Despite no global warming in 10 years and recording setting cold in 2007-2008, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climatic Change (IPCC) and computer modelers who believe that CO2 is the cause of global warming still predict the Earth is in store for catastrophic warming in this century. IPCC computer models have predicted global warming of 1° F per decade and 5-6° C (10-11° F) by 2100 (Fig. 1), which would cause global catastrophe with ramifications for human life, natural habitat, energy and water resources, and food production. All of this is predicated on the assumption that global warming is caused by increasing atmospheric CO2 and that CO2 will continue to rise rapidly.

However, records of past climate changes suggest an altogether different scenario for the 21st century. Rather than drastic global warming at a rate of 0.5 ° C (1° F) per decade, historic records of past natural cycles suggest global cooling for the first several decades of the 21st century to about 2030, followed by global warming from about 2030 to about 2060, and renewed global cooling from 2060 to 2090 (Easterbrook, D.J., 2005, 2006a, b, 2007, 2008a, b); Easterbrook and Kovanen, 2000, 2001). Climatic fluctuations over the past several hundred years suggest ~30 year climatic cycles of global warming and cooling, on a general rising trend from the Little Ice Age.

PREDICTIONS BASED ON PAST CLIMATE PATTERNS

Global climate changes have been far more intense (12 to 20 times as intense in some cases) than the global warming of the past century, and they took place in as little as 20–100 years. Global warming of the past century (0.8° C) is virtually insignificant when compared to the magnitude of at least 10 global climate changes in the past 15,000 years. None of these sudden global climate changes could possibly have been caused by human CO2 input to the atmosphere because they all took place long before anthropogenic CO2 emissions began. The cause of the ten earlier ‘natural’ climate changes was most likely the same as the cause of global warming from 1977 to 1998.

Climatic fluctuations over the past several hundred years suggest ~30 year climatic cycles of global warming and cooling (Figure 3) on a generally rising trend from the Little Ice Age about 500 years ago.

After several decades of studying alpine glacier fluctuations in the North Cascade Range, my research showed a distinct pattern of glacial advances and retreats (the Glacial Decadal Oscillation, GDO) that correlated well with climate records. In 1992, Mantua published the Pacific Decadal Oscillation curve showing warming and cooling of the Pacific Ocean that correlated remarkably well with glacial fluctuations. Both the GDA and the PDO matched global temperature records and were obviously related (Fig. 4). All but the latest 30 years of changes occurred prior to significant CO2 emissions so they were clearly unrelated to atmospheric CO2.

The significance of the correlation between the GDO, PDO, and global temperature is that once this connection has been made, climatic changes during the past century can be understood, and the pattern of glacial and climatic fluctuations over the past millennia can be reconstructed. These patterns can then be used to project climatic changes in the future. Using the pattern established for the past several hundred years, in 1998 I projected the temperature curve for the past century into the next century and came up with curve ‘A’ in Figure 5 as an approximation of what might be in store for the world if the pattern of past climate changes continued. Ironically, that prediction was made in the warmest year of the past three decades and at the acme of the 1977-1998 warm period. At that time, the projected curved indicated global cooling beginning about 2005 ± 3-5 years until about 2030, then renewed warming from about 2030 to about 2060 (unrelated to CO2—just continuation of the natural cycle), then another cool period from about 2060 to about 2090. This was admittedly an approximation, but it was radically different from the 1° F per decade warming called for by the IPCC. Because the prediction was so different from the IPCC prediction, time would obviously show which projection was ultimately correct.

Now a decade later, the global climate has not warmed 1° F as forecast by the IPCC but has cooled slightly until 2007-08 when global temperatures turned sharply downward. In 2008, NASA satellite imagery (Figure 6) confirmed that the Pacific Ocean had switched from the warm mode it had been in since 1977 to its cool mode, similar to that of the 1945-1977 global cooling period. The shift strongly suggests that the next several decades will be cooler, not warmer as predicted by the IPCC.

Figure 5. Global temperature projection for the coming century, based on warming/cooling cycles of the past several centuries. ‘A’ projection based on assuming next cool phase will be similar to the 1945-1977 cool phase. ‘B’ projection based on assuming next cool phase will be similar to the 1880-1915 cool phase. The predicted warm cycle from 2030 to 2060 is based on projection of the 1977 to 1998 warm phase and the cooling phase from 2060 to 2090 is based on projection of the 1945 to 1977 cool cycle.

The IPCC prediction of global temperatures, 1° F warmer by 2011 and 2° F by 2038 (Fig. 1), stand little chance of being correct. NASA’s imagery showing that the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) has shifted to its cool phase is right on schedule as predicted by past climate and PDO changes (Easterbrook, 2001, 2006, 2007). The PDO typically lasts 25-30 years and assures North America of cool, wetter climates during its cool phases and warmer, drier climates during its warm phases. The establishment of the cool PDO, together with similar cooling of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), virtually assures several decades of global cooling and the end of the past 30-year warm phase. It also means that the IPCC predictions of catastrophic global warming this century were highly inaccurate.

The switch of PDO cool mode to warm mode in 1977 initiated several decades of global warming. The PDO has now switched from its warm mode (where it had been since 1977) into its cool mode. As shown on the graph above, each time this had happened in the past century, global temperature has followed. The upper map shows cool ocean temperatures in blue (note the North American west coast). The lower diagram shows how the PDO has switched back and forth from warm to cool modes in the past century, each time causing global temperature to follow. Comparisons of historic global climate warming and cooling over the past century with PDO and NAO oscillations, glacial fluctuations, and sun spot activity show strong correlations and provide a solid data base for future climate change projections.

The Pacific Ocean has a warm temperature mode and a cool temperature mode, and in the past century, has switched back forth between these two modes every 25-30 years (known as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation or PDO). In 1977 the Pacific abruptly shifted from its cool mode (where it had been since about 1945) into its warm mode, and this initiated global warming from 1977 to 1998. The correlation between the PDO and global climate is well established. The announcement by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory that the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) had shifted to its cool phase is right on schedule as predicted by past climate and PDO changes (Easterbrook, 2001, 2006, 2007). The PDO typically lasts 25-30 years and assures North America of cool, wetter climates during its cool phases and warmer, drier climates during its warm phases. The establishment of the cool PDO, together with similar cooling of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), virtually assures several decades of global cooling and the end of the past 30-year warm phase.

Figure 6. Switch of PDO cool mode to warm mode in 1977 initiated several decades of global warming. The PDO has now switched from its warm mode (where it had been since 1977) into its cool mode. As shown on the graph above, each time this has happened in the past century, global temperature has followed. The upper map shows cool ocean temperatures in blue (note the North American west coast). The lower diagram shows how the PDO has switched back and forth from warm to cool modes in the past century, each time causing global temperature to follow. Projection of the past pattern (right end of graph) assures 30 yrs of global cooling

Comparisons of historic global climate warming and cooling over the past century with PDO and NAO oscillations, glacial fluctuations, and sun spot activity show strong correlations and provide a solid data base for future climate change projections. As shown by the historic pattern of GDOs and PDOs over the past century and by corresponding global warming and cooling, the pattern is part of ongoing warm/cool cycles that last 25-30 years. The global cooling phase from 1880 to 1910, characterized by advance of glaciers worldwide, was followed by a shift to the warm-phase PDO for 30 years, global warming and rapid glacier recession. The cool-phase PDO returned in ~1945 accompanied by global cooling and glacial advance for 30 years. Shift to the warm-phase PDO in 1977 initiated global warming and recession of glaciers that persisted until 1998. Recent establishment of the PDO cool phase appeared right on target and assuming that its effect will be similar to past history, global climates can be expected to cool over the next 25-30 years. The global warming of this century is exactly in phase with the normal climatic pattern of cyclic warming and cooling and we have now switched from a warm phase to a cool phase right at the predicted time (Fig. 5)

The ramifications of the global cooling cycle for the next 30 years are far reaching?e.g., failure of crops in critical agricultural areas (it’s already happening this year), increasing energy demands, transportation difficulties, and habitat change. All this during which global population will increase from six billion to about nine billion. The real danger in spending trillions of dollars trying to reduce atmospheric CO2 is that little will be left to deal with the very real problems engendered by global cooling.

CONCLUSIONS

Global warming (i.e, the warming since 1977) is over. The minute increase of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008%) was not the cause of the warming—it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years.

The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling, perhaps much deeper than the global cooling from about 1945 to 1977. Just how much cooler the global climate will be during this cool cycle is uncertain. Recent solar changes suggest that it could be fairly severe, perhaps more like the 1880 to 1915 cool cycle than the more moderate 1945-1977 cool cycle. A more drastic cooling, similar to that during the Dalton and Maunder minimums, could plunge the Earth into another Little Ice Age, but only time will tell if that is likely.

Don J. Easterbrook is Professor Emeritus of Geology at Western Washington University. Bellingham, WA. He has published extensively on issues pertaining to global climate change. For further details see his list of publications

Attack the Corporations that provide life time employment opportunities for Americans, and the corporations will make choices that are in the best interest of the business. Making profit is a very important dynamic to running a business that will be sustainable long term; duh…

Why is President Obama so angry at the very businesses that provide thousands of jobs for Americans, as well as providing millions-billions of tax revenue for the State? What are his motives? At this rate, 20% unemployment could very well be reached sooner rather than later…

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/04/microsoft-answers-obamas-taxation-plans/feed/2MSM OUT – SRM INhttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/04/msm-out-srm-in/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/04/msm-out-srm-in/#commentsFri, 05 Jun 2009 02:14:58 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=3994The Main Stream Media is no longer; dead as a leech out of water on a 100 degree day…

Once a source of daily stories and information for millions of citizens, this dinosaur has joined the ranks of respected and feared beasts that once roamed the earth searching for prey.

Taking the place of the print media formerly knows as the MSM, is the State Run Media, or SRM abbreviated. Yes some faces look familiar. Yes some voices sound familiar. But don’t let any of that fool you, as the boss of this industry now resides in Washington DC and hands down the directives each day.

“‘Rush and Newt Are Winning’ — A media environment that tilts to the right is obscuring what President Obama stands for and closing off political options that should be part of the public discussion. Yes, you read that correctly: If you doubt that there is a conservative inclination in the media, consider which arguments you hear regularly and which you don’t. When Rush Limbaugh sneezes or Newt Gingrich tweets, their views ricochet from the Internet to cable television and into the traditional media. It is remarkable how successful they are in setting what passes for the news agenda. The power of the Limbaugh-Gingrich axis means that Obama is regularly cast as somewhere on the far left end of a truncated political spectrum. He’s the guy who nominates a ‘racist’ to the Supreme Court (though Gingrich retreated from the word yesterday), wants to weaken America’s defenses against terrorism and is proposing a massive government takeover of the private economy.

E.J., your premise is wrong. We’re not turning state-controlled media to the right. It’s just that I, maybe Newt now and then, are the only ones saying what we say. Everybody else in the state-controlled media is an echo chamber. Whatever dictation you get from Axelrod or Gibbs, you’re right, but there’s an alternative voice out there and it stands out simply by virtue of its stark contrast and difference. I mean, what would be so hard, E.J., about you realizing and reporting that Obama is taking over the private economy? He’s not proposing to. He’s doing it. What would you call a guy who gave a speech — somebody counted it up the other day — his speech assuring the country what was going to happen to General Motors after bankruptcy, 34 times he used the word “I.” He never said we’re going to get legislation to get this done. I, the president, the president and the White House statement that came out, the president has deemed the plan put forth by GM workable. We’ve got a miniature dictator-in-waiting here, in his own mind, and he is taking over the private sector.

E.J. Dionne, Jr., is alarmed. “Steve Forbes, writing for his magazine, recently went so far as to compare Obama’s economic policies to those of Juan Peron’s Argentina.” I don’t need to point this out, but I think I did that first, too, when talking about industrial policy and automobiles, and Forbes is right. This is out of Juan Peron’s Argentina. The only thing we’re waiting on is for Michelle to become Evita and Michelle has now weighed in on Sotomayor, and Victor Davis Hanson at National Review has a brilliant take on this. He is also convinced that anger is what is inspiring and motivating the Obamas and the Sotomayors of the world. They are angry. Even though she’s been appointed to the Supreme Court she’s still mad at the way she was treated at Princeton. Michelle is still mad the way she was treated at Princeton. That was the subject of her thesis. These people have chips on their shoulders. First lady of the United States, and she’s still mad, president of the United States, he’s still mad. I don’t doubt this at all. In fact, I mentioned that to Sean Hannity in the second installment of the interview that will run tonight on the Hannity show on the Fox News Channel, second installment at nine o’clock. By the way, thanks to all of you with the wonderfully nice e-mail notes about that interview, very kind.

Back to E.J. Dionne, Jr. here: “While the right wing’s rants get wall-to-wall airtime, you almost never hear from the sort of progressive members of Congress who were on an America’s Future panel on Tuesday. Reps. Jared Polis of Colorado, Donna Edwards of Maryland and Raul Grijalva of Arizona all said warm things about the president — they are Democrats, after all — but also took issue with some of his policies. … As it happens, I am closer than the progressive trio is to Obama’s view on Afghanistan. But why are their voices,” meaning these Democrats in Congress. Have you ever heard of these people before I mentioned their names? “– why are their voices muffled when they raise legitimate concerns, while Limbaugh’s rants get amplified?” Poor E.J., he just doesn’t understand, even though he is a member of the state-controlled media, he doesn’t understand how it works.

Let’s see, “For all the talk of a media love affair with Obama, there is a deep and largely unconscious conservative bias in the media’s discussion of policy.” That is just incomprehensible, how anybody could view the state-run media today and conclude that it has an unconscious conservative bias. E.J., have you noticed when all these outlets that you decry use videotape or audiotape of me, have you noticed what they do with it? They satirize it, they pound it, they criticize it, they loop the video, they try to make me look like the biggest buffoon on the face of the earth. They are now running bulletins at MSNBC of what I say, but here I am, CNN just announced the latest approval numbers, I’m at 30%, I have a 30% favorable rating, and yet I am dragging, according to E.J. Dionne, Jr., the state-controlled media to the right.

I have here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers an AP story, and the headline of the AP story is amazing: “‘Jobless Benefit Rolls Fall, Initial Claims Dip.’ — The number of people on the unemployment insurance rolls fell slightly for the first time in 20 weeks –” cheer, cheer, rah-rah, great news, thank you, Obama, is the implication “– while the tally of new jobless claims also dipped.” Wow! Obama’s fabulous. The stimulus is working! The number of people on the unemployment insurance rolls fell slightly, while the tally of new jobless claims also dipped. But wait, you gotta go halfway down this story, more than the average American will spend time on a news story, to find this — and the way it’s written is classic: “The unemployment rate, meanwhile, will rise to 9.2 percent from 8.9 percent in April.”

ow, wait a second here. The lead is the number of Americans on the unemployment insurance rolls fell, and the tally of new claims also dipped. Yes, more people are going to work! No, people are not going to work. More people are out of work. Unemployment rate 9.2%, up from 8.9%. Do you realize this is .2% higher than they predicted, and now they’re saying it might be 10% by the end of next year. We’ve lost over two million jobs this year, since January, two million jobs have been lost. There is no way to calculate jobs saved; that is a myth. Some other highlights here of the story: “The total jobless benefit rolls fell by 15,000 to 6.7 million, the first drop since early January. Continuing claims had set record highs every week since the week ending Jan. 24. The continuing claims data lag initial claims by one week. … The number of initial jobless claims remains stubbornly high, above the 605,000 level reached five weeks ago. That was the lowest level in 14 weeks.” They’re working so hard, they are twisting themselves into pretzels to take this continuing bad news and try to put a good light on it.

There’s one thing missing here. I’m sure you’re wondering how in the hell can unemployment go up from 8.9% to 9.2% while AP-Obama reports that the number of Americans on unemployment insurance fell? How can that be? I’ll tell you how and there’s something they always included when reporting unemployment numbers with George W. Bush that’s not in this story. And it is this. I have to paraphrase it because I remember reading this in all the Bush unemployment stories, but it was, “These figures do not include the number of people who have just given up trying to find a job.” Or who think it’s not worth looking for a job. That’s how it’s gone up. They’re not counting the people who have just given up. They’re not counting the people who may have left the unemployment rolls but don’t have a job because the state-run media is doing everything it can here, to prop up a bad economy in the minds of people to make it look like Obama’s plans are working.

State run banks - check

State run auto makers - check

State run media - check

State run health care - coming

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/04/msm-out-srm-in/feed/4Is ACORN above the Law?http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/03/is-acorn-above-the-law/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/03/is-acorn-above-the-law/#commentsWed, 03 Jun 2009 13:51:19 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=3897We just witnessed the Obama administration put a halt to criminal proceedings against the New Black Panthers for voter intimidation. We are watching as ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) is under investigation in several States spread out across the country. Will anything come of these investigations? Will President Obama come to the rescue of his former employer?

Iowa GOP Congressman Steve King is calling for simultaneous FBI and congressional investigations into what he calls a “spiderweb” of shadowy financial and business relationships linked to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

“With ACORN, it’s pervasive,” King tells Newsmax, referring to criminal allegations and malfeasance leveled at ACORN’s low-income, voter-registration operation. “It’s everywhere. It’s 12 or 14 states where there are investigations going on for voter registration [fraud].

“ACORN has admitted to … around 400,000 fraudulent voter-registration forms being introduced. They claim they don’t hire people on commission, but they do hire people on commission,” King tells Newsmax in an exclusive interview.

See Video: Rep. Steve King discusses his probe into ACORN – Click Here Now

King says ACORN has over 270 corporate affiliates and business units that have received more than $53 million in federal tax dollars. Recent stimulus legislation, he tells Newsmax, could give the organization access up to $8.5 billion.

According to a recent Fox News report, over 250 nonprofit groups list ACORN’s New Orleans headquarters as their address. One of those groups is Citizens Services Inc., which received $800,000 from the Obama administration in return for a get-out-the-vote program during last year’s campaign.

Although King charges that ACORN is “in the business of electing Democrats,” he says its impact transcends politics. He tells Newsmax the organization has intimidated bank executives into making risky mortgage loans to people who shouldn’t have received them, adding that is “a contributing factor, I believe, to this financial meltdown that we have.”

King, who has represented Iowa’s fifth congressional district since 2002, describes ACORN as “an organization that erodes the integrity of the election process,” adding: “I believe it has completely the face of a criminal enterprise, and it should be thoroughly investigated by Congress and the Department of Justice. And it should happen simultaneously.”

Although King says ACORN is responsible for “hundreds of thousands of fraudulent voter registration forms,” the type of investigation he wants would go far beyond current state and FBI investigations for alleged voter fraud. Rather, it would look into the interlocking financial connections between ACORN and its affiliate organizations.

To date, there have been four post-election prosecutions by state authorities involving ACORN. All focus on voter fraud rather than finances.

“We need to do a lot more. We cannot let them bring down our election process,” King tells Newsmax.

This spiderweb of corruption must be addressed if we are to hold on to our Democracy. Every American citizen should demand a fair and thorough investigation into these allegations take place by the FBI. Our Laws need apply to every citizen, including the Political Establishment…

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/03/is-acorn-above-the-law/feed/2British Political Establishment living Large on the Taxpayer’s Dime; sound familiarhttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/02/british-political-establishment-living-large-on-the-taxpayers-dime-sound-familiar/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/02/british-political-establishment-living-large-on-the-taxpayers-dime-sound-familiar/#commentsWed, 03 Jun 2009 00:24:12 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=3855Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, is to stand down from the Cabinet to focus her efforts on saving her Commons seat after bruising revelations over her parliamentary expenses.

A source close to Ms Smith said that she told Gordon Brown of her intention to resign two months ago amid a controversy over her second home claims. The source said that she had “hurt” by the controversy, which included the humiliation of having to refund taxpayers for two blue movies watched by her husband.

On a day when it appeared when the Prime Minister’s control of events was looking particularly shaky, it emerged that another minister was also heading for the exit. Tom Watson is standing down as Cabinet Office minister but will continue to advise the Prime Minister and help organize campaigns.

In addition, three other Labour MPs – David Chaytor, Beverley Hughes and Patricia Hewitt – announced that they would be leaving the Commons at the next election, adding their names to an increasingly long list.

Mr Chaytor is accused of claiming £13,000 in parliamentary expenses for a mortgage that had already been paid off. The MP for Bury North said that he was stepping aside because his priority in the coming months must be to explain his errors to investigators.

Ms Smith’s decision to jump before she was pushed – she had been widely expected to be moved from her post – paves the way for an even broader Cabinet shake-up in a reshuffle now expected on Monday.

Ms Smith is being investigated by the parliamentary Commissioner for Standards after claiming her main residence was her sister’s London home. That allows her to claim £116,000 on her Redditch home which she shares with her husband and children. Items claimed included a flat screen TV, scatter cushions, a £40 barbecue and even a bathplug. She was also forced to pay back £10 she claimed for the two adult films watched by her husband, Richard Timney, who is employed as her assistant.

There were mixed feelings in Ms Smith’s constituency. Peter Turner, 72, a lifelong Labour voter, said: “It’s very embarrassing for her, her husband’s actions were the most damaging. “I would consider voting for her but I think the tide is against her at the moment. The husband, the bath plug, it was all a bit petty wasn’t it – fancy claiming for a bath plug.”

Another constituent said: “If we hadn’t found out about this it would still be going on, that is the worrying thing. I’ll be glad to see Jacqui Smith go, most people around here are angry with her and I don’t think she has any hope of getting the votes. If any ordinary person had behaved like these politicians, they would have been arrested.”

Michael Martin, the Commons Speaker, will this afternoon announce that he is to stand down over the MPs’ expenses scandal.

Mr Martin is expected to inform MPs of his departure in a statement to the Commons at 2.30pm, just 24 hours after being humiliated in the chamber by cross-party calls for his resignation.

“I can confirm that the Speaker is making a statement this afternoon and that it is about himself,” his spokeswoman said. It is unclear whether he will resign immediately or stay on until the next election.

Meanwhile, American pundits are starting to make comparisons between the huge scandal of the British Commons Speaker to the recent troubles of American House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, though the scandals coming from entirely different circumstances.

Michael Martin, who engenders as much hatred and love as his American counterpart Ms. Pelosi, is being asked to resign or face expulsion: this would be the first removal of a speaker of the House of Commons in three hundred years, and it transpires that before 1709 seven speakers were beheaded!

Martin’s crimes are as follows: 1) blocking, over a period of years, the very revelations that the Daily Telegraph newspaper has now been exposing and 2) allegedly not informing the House that opposition MP Damian Green’s house was raided by police without a warrant. In the week of May 11 the speaker was accused by a former aide, John Stonborough, of reacting “extremely violently” as far back as 2003 at the suggestion that his decision to claim a second home allowance on his house in Glasgow while living in a “grace and favor” home in Westminster did not “look good.”

I was about to say the Brits are not tea party types, but as this goes to press we may see the first beheading in three hundred years.

Back in the States, Nancy Pelosi is not accused of any financial improprieties, such as mis-reporting a housing allowance (resigned Justice Minister Shahiid Malik), or having a husband who accessed internet porn on the taxpayer dime (Minister Jacqui Smith), or even listing horse manure as a valid reimbursement expense as one backbencher Labour MP is alleged to have done.

Rather, the Speaker of the House of the United States of America is accused of endangering National Security, by exposing tactics used by the Central Intelligence Agency to gain information on future terrorist attacks upon the US, and then deliberately covering up and lying about her knowledge of that intelligence.

Citizens of Great Britain have run out of tolerance for such behavior. Just how much tolerance Americans have left in the tank is yet to be seen. Congress is loaded up with scandals, with Miss Speaker up to her eye balls in lies and abuse of power. Let’s not forget to mention her living very high on the taxpayer’s dollar every time she flies her gas guzzling beast of an airplane from Washington DC to her home in California.

While on this subject… How about using taxpayer dollars for a night out on the town at the tune of some seventy thousand dollars. What about that Mr. President?

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/02/british-political-establishment-living-large-on-the-taxpayers-dime-sound-familiar/feed/3So the British Press is sharper than ours? Part threehttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/02/so-the-british-press-is-sharper-than-ours-part-three/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/02/so-the-british-press-is-sharper-than-ours-part-three/#commentsTue, 02 Jun 2009 13:43:56 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=3817I simply can’t help but to ask the question. Wouldn’t it be a breath of fresh air to read the following analysis from an American newspaper? Thoughtful, provocative, articulate, with a twinge of historical relevance…

It is time for President Obama to recognise that his strategy is weakening his country and making the United States more vulnerable to attack, says Nile Gardiner

No leader in American history has gone to greater lengths than Barack Obama to make amends for his own country. From condemnation of American “arrogance” in a speech in Strasbourg to acknowledging U.S. “mistakes” before millions of Muslims on Arab television, Obama has rarely missed an opportunity to apologise for the actions of the American people.

President Obama has elevated the art of national self-loathing to new heights, and seems to delight in prostrating the most powerful nation on the face of the earth before its critics and rivals, especially on foreign soil. The Obama worldview revolves around the central premise that the United States must be humble and “engage” and work with its enemies through the application of “smart power”. There is nothing smart, however, in appeasing rogue states such as North Korea or Iran.

The Obama doctrine is now lying in tatters after North Korean tyrant Kim Jong-Il and Iranian demagogue Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met Obama’s recent overtures with missile tests and even a nuclear blast from Pyongyang. The president’s video message in March offering “a new beginning” to “the people and leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran” was followed by the launch of a surface-to-surface missile with a range of 1,200 miles capable of reaching southern Europe. Incredibly, the U.S. response has been to slash defense spending, with a dramatic scaling down of plans for a global missile defence shield.

The world today is considerably more dangerous than it was in the days of the Bush Administration, and the Obama White House has nothing to show for its weak-kneed efforts. The brutal truth is that the United States is increasingly viewed as a soft touch by its enemies, increasingly jeered rather than feared.

Obama’s supine approach has become a humiliating spectacle for a country that, together with Great Britain, has done more to advance the cause of liberty and freedom across the world than any nation in the world. Every groveling apology by the president undermines America’s confidence, standing and power, and strengthens the hand of those who seek her destruction.

It is time for President Obama to recognise that his new strategy is weakening his country and making the United States more vulnerable to attack. The dream of America haters who revel in the vision of the humbling of a superpower, is being realised by an administration that has so far fundamentally rejected the idea of American exceptionalism.

The world needs a president who aggressively projects American power on the world stage, rather than seeks the adoration of traditionally hostile foreign audiences. In Egypt, Obama should not be afraid to offend the sensibilities of Muslim leaders, by calling for religious tolerance, freedom of speech, worship and association, and a rejection of Islamist extremism.

No one expects Barack Obama to adopt the swagger of a John Wayne or Clint Eastwood when he travels to the Middle East and Western Europe. But he should adopt a more forceful and confident approach to international affairs that marks him as a force to be reckoned with rather than a Jimmy Carter-like pushover. It is not too late for the president to acknowledge that the time for apologies is over, that the world needs robust American leadership that projects strength and power rather than timidity and weakness.

Read the entire article, it’s refreshing… If only in America!

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/02/so-the-british-press-is-sharper-than-ours-part-three/feed/6California school district to force feed Gay Curriculumhttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/01/california-school-district-to-force-feed-gay-curriculum/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/06/01/california-school-district-to-force-feed-gay-curriculum/#commentsMon, 01 Jun 2009 23:31:10 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=3795Is it any wonder why California is such a train wreck? Bankrupt following decades of Democrat rule controlled by powerful unions, California is sliding off the cliff into the abyss. Lacking a moral rudder, the so called elites in control of the Department of Education in Alameda have taken the results of Proposition 8 and shoved it right down the throat of it’s voters.

Elementary school teachers in Alameda, Calif., will introduce lesson plans to their educational curriculum beginning next year that address gay and lesbian issues, KCBS News in San Francisco reports.

Kindergarten through grade 5 students throughout the county will be exposed to same-sex educational material aimed at promoting tolerance and inclusiveness.

The curriculum –– which will include lessons to introduce students to “LGBT” (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transsexual) issues –– will be designed to discourage bullying and teasing based on gay and lesbian stereotypes. The plan will be implemented despite objections by parents who complain children are too young to be exposed to the material.

Many parents are condemning the lesson plan as sex education in disguise and are angered that they will not be allowed to exempt their children from the lessons. Opponents decry the curriculum plan as an effort to advance the gay, lesbian and transgendered agenda.

Those opposed to sexual orientation lessons for children are so upset they are threatening to sue the school board, ABC News reports. Promoting gay, lesbian and sexual orientation should be a parents’ rights issue, parents say, and is not an appropriate topic for school children.

The Alameda school district’s legal counsel, however, recommended the plan because the curriculum does not deal with health or sex education, which are topics that do require opt-out provisions.

“It was the opinion of our legal counsel that this curriculum was not health or sex education curriculum,” school board president Mike McMahon told CNS New.

“If a student responds that one family in the book is made up of a mother, a father, and two children and a cat, you may acknowledge that some families look like this, but ask students for other examples of what a family can look like.”

School Board Member Trish Spencer, who voted against the plan, said she worries that its implementation could lead to the harassment of students who have religious objections to homosexuality. She cited that bullying due to religion is a bigger problem for the district than bullying based on homosexuality.

Also adamantly opposed to the plan is Randy Thomasson, president of the Campaign for Children and Families.

“This will be done whether parents like it or not, and it shows the hostility against parental rights and traditional family values,” Thomasson, told CNS New.

Last month, the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, the voter-approved initiative to make same-sex marriage illegal that passed in November.

The Alameda school board said it will review its decision to implement the curriculum at the end of next year’s school session.

I wish Ted would stop holding back, and tell us how he really feels!!!

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/31/red-meat-ted-nugent-live/feed/6American Capitalism gone with a whimperhttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/30/american-capitalism-gone-with-a-whimper/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/30/american-capitalism-gone-with-a-whimper/#commentsSat, 30 May 2009 13:53:42 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=3632Yesterday I asked if the British Press is better than ours. Today I ask if the Russian Press is better than ours.

Pravda.RU recently posted this article which I found to be a pretty fair assessment of the current state of affairs we Americans find ourselves in. Although I don’t agree with everything written in this piece, I do find this article to be more accurate than anything coming from the American Press, or any other element of the so called “Main Stream Media.”

It must be said, that like the breaking of a great dam, the American decent into Marxism is happening with breath taking speed, against the back drop of a passive, hapless sheeple, excuse me dear reader, I meant people.

True, the situation has been well prepared on and off for the past century, especially the past twenty years. The initial testing grounds was conducted upon our Holy Russia and a bloody test it was. But we Russians would not just roll over and give up our freedoms and our souls, no matter how much money Wall Street poured into the fists of the Marxists.

Those lessons were taken and used to properly prepare the American populace for the surrender of their freedoms and souls, to the whims of their elites and betters.

First, the population was dumbed down through a politicized and substandard education system based on pop culture, rather then the classics. Americans know more about their favorite TV dramas then the drama in DC that directly affects their lives. They care more for their “right” to choke down a McDonalds burger or a BurgerKing burger than for their constitutional rights. Then they turn around and lecture us about our rights and about our “democracy”. Pride blind the foolish.

Then their faith in God was destroyed, until their churches, all tens of thousands of different “branches and denominations” were for the most part little more then Sunday circuses and their televangelists and top protestant mega preachers were more then happy to sell out their souls and flocks to be on the “winning” side of one pseudo Marxist politician or another. Their flocks may complain, but when explained that they would be on the “winning” side, their flocks were ever so quick to reject Christ in hopes for earthly power. Even our Holy Orthodox churches are scandalously liberalized in America.

The final collapse has come with the election of Barack Obama. His speed in the past three months has been truly impressive. His spending and money printing has been a record setting, not just in America’s short history but in the world. If this keeps up for more then another year, and there is no sign that it will not, America at best will resemble the Wiemar Republic and at worst Zimbabwe.

These past two weeks have been the most breath taking of all. First came the announcement of a planned redesign of the American Byzantine tax system, by the very thieves who used it to bankroll their thefts, loses and swindles of hundreds of billions of dollars. These make our Russian oligarchs look little more then ordinary street thugs, in comparison. Yes, the Americans have beat our own thieves in the shear volumes. Should we congratulate them?

These men, of course, are not an elected panel but made up of appointees picked from the very financial oligarchs and their henchmen who are now gorging themselves on trillions of American dollars, in one bailout after another. They are also usurping the rights, duties and powers of the American congress (parliament). Again, congress has put up little more then a whimper to their masters.

Then came Barack Obama’s command that GM’s (General Motor) president step down from leadership of his company. That is correct, dear reader, in the land of “pure” free markets, the American president now has the power, the self given power, to fire CEOs and we can assume other employees of private companies, at will. Come hither, go dither, the centurion commands his minions.

So it should be no surprise, that the American president has followed this up with a “bold” move of declaring that he and another group of unelected, chosen stooges will now redesign the entire automotive industry and will even be the guarantee of automobile policies. I am sure that if given the chance, they would happily try and redesign it for the whole of the world, too. Prime Minister Putin, less then two months ago, warned Obama and UK’s Blair, not to follow the path to Marxism, it only leads to disaster. Apparently, even though we suffered 70 years of this Western sponsored horror show, we know nothing, as foolish, drunken Russians, so let our “wise” Anglo-Saxon fools find out the folly of their own pride.

Again, the American public has taken this with barely a whimper…but a “freeman” whimper.

So, should it be any surprise to discover that the Democratically controlled Congress of America is working on passing a new regulation that would give the American Treasury department the power to set “fair” maximum salaries, evaluate performance and control how private companies give out pay raises and bonuses? Senator Barney Franks, a social pervert basking in his homosexuality (of course, amongst the modern, enlightened American societal norm, as well as that of the general West, homosexuality is not only not a looked down upon life choice, but is often praised as a virtue) and his Marxist enlightenment, has led this effort. He stresses that this only affects companies that receive government monies, but it is retroactive and taken to a logical extreme, this would include any company or industry that has ever received a tax break or incentive.

The Russian owners of American companies and industries should look thoughtfully at this and the option of closing their facilities down and fleeing the land of the Red as fast as possible. In other words, divest while there is still value left.

The proud American will go down into his slavery with out a fight, beating his chest and proclaiming to the world, how free he really is. The world will only snicker.

Following years of Political Correctness, where law suits were filed in droves against anyone who dared utter truthful words that a Judge could deem as harmful. Following years of law suits filed in droves against any business who dared to serve hot coffee, or fries with salt covering the delicious little piece of potato, fried to perfection in a pool of hot oil… Yes folks, Lawyers, Judges, a lazy partisan media, corrupt power hungry Politicians, and a long term plan devised in some think tank by radicals, is finally coming to fruition.

I posted the entire article, as the site continues to come on and off line…

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/30/american-capitalism-gone-with-a-whimper/feed/6So the British Press is sharper than ours? Part twohttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/29/so-the-british-press-is-sharper-than-ours-part-two/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/29/so-the-british-press-is-sharper-than-ours-part-two/#commentsFri, 29 May 2009 13:00:08 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=3571Last week I posted this story. Based on the fact that the story received only two comments, I’d say it’s safe to say not many people found this story interesting. Apparently the White House found this story less than interesting also; in fact, I’d say the WH let this story get under their skin a bit.

Politico has an extraordinary report on Robert Gibbs, the White House Press Secretary, launching a furious broadside against the British press. Here are Gibbs’ sneering and condescending remarks:

“I want to speak generally about some reports I’ve witnessed over the past few years in the British media,” Gibbs said. “In some ways, I’m surprised it filtered down.”

“Let’s just say if I wanted to look up, if I wanted to read a write-up of how Manchester United fared last night in the Champions League Cup, I’d might open up a British newspaper,” he continued. “If I was looking for something that bordered on truthful news, I’m not entirely sure it’d be the first pack of clips I’d pick up.”

Gibbs’ juvenile comments followed an article in The Daily Telegraph relating to the President’s decision not to release new photos reportedly showing appalling prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib by a tiny minority of military personnel. The straightforward news piece, hotly disputed by the White House, is based upon an interview with Major General Antonio Taguba, who oversaw the inquiry into the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal.

1. Congratulations. Your presidential regime has managed to secure the most supine, slobbering, spineless, unquestioning media coverage since Enver Hoxha’s Albania. A report last month by the Center for Media and Public Affairs said Obama has received more coverage than his two predecessors combined. On ABC, CBS and NBC news the majority of evaluations – 58 per cent – have been favorable. (Compare GW Bush – 33 per cent; Bill Clinton 44 per cent – in first 50 days of office). More importantly, you have Pravda. Yes, no less than 73 per cent of all evaluative comments in your chief propaganda organ – aka The New York Times – have been favourable to Obama.

2. Sure your congenitally libtard Mainstream Media were probably biased that way anyway, but you have played your part. Your combative style – which led you to dismiss the entire British print media just now in one glib, sneering phrase – has earned you the nickname “The Enforcer.” You have a reputation for coming down hard on any media outlet which doesn’t follow your approved version of reality. “I work the referee a little bit,” as you once put it. (A reference, perhaps, to when you played goalkeeper for your college football team).

3. If you are going to make clever-sounding football references displaying your rich understanding of the British press, try to get your terminology right. We call it the “Champions League.” Not the “Champions League cup.”

4. That’s only the beginning of your problems, matey. Your treatment not just of the British media but of Britain generally smacks of a risible ineptitude. First, you let President Obama send back the Winston Churchill bust. Then, you insult our visiting prime minister with a dismally low-key reception (worthy of a minor African head of state, not your closest and most loyal ally) and shoddy gifts (those DVDs). Then you compound the insult by having one of your monkeys declare, Chicago-politics-style, “”There’s nothing special about Britain. You’re just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn’t expect special treatment.” OK so we know Obama’s not much interested in foreign affairs and has a special loathing for Britain because it roughed up his Kenyan granddad during the Mau Mau insurrection. But don’t you realise, that one of your jobs as his press secretary is to make out like he loves us so much even his underpants have a union flag on them?

5. Insulting the British print media. Big mistake. We know we’re not angels. We know we can go over the top sometimes. But unfortunately that’s a much bigger problem for you than it is for us. You see, while a lot of your mainstream media will hold fire on stories which they think may reflect poorly on your wondrous Obamamessiah – what his half-brother has been up to, say – we have fewer qualms about telling it like it is. So far, you’ve had a pretty easy ride. The Obama Kool Aid has proved almost as popular beverage in Britain as it is in the US. But just you wait till we start showing our teeth.

6. A lot of Americans know this. They appreciate our irreverence. They enjoy our frank criticisms of all the myriad areas where Obama is getting it so badly wrong – everything from his disastrous cap and trade measures, to his brutal treatment of Chrysler dealerships which didn’t support him, to his pork barrelling, to his failure to do anything that looks remotely like rescuing the US economy. That’s why they come to read us online: because they can and there’s nothing you can do to stop them.

7. We had a guy just like you over here once. Guy named Alastair Campbell. Did for our now heavily discredited prime minister Tony Blair what you do for Obama: a little light press bullying; professional turd polishing; that kind of thing. We hated Alastair Campbell, really loathed him. But he got away with bullying us because in those days we didn’t know any better. We were still going through this sort of dumb-cattle phase where we still had some vestigial respect for politicians and trust that they knew what they were doing.

8. But we don’t respect politicians any more. Not our politicians, and not yours either. Imagine how this new strain of irreverence bordering on utter contempt is going to affect our reporting of political affairs. Actually, you’ve no need to imagine. Just read some of our Telegraph blogs.

The Obama administration simply can’t handle negative critique in any shape or form. These people are behaving like juvenile teenagers. Press secretary Gibbs warning to the world to be very careful what gets said when referring to Judge Sotomayor, is another example of this thug juvenile behavior on display from the White House.

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/29/so-the-british-press-is-sharper-than-ours-part-two/feed/12So the British Press is sharper than ours?http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/26/so-the-british-press-is-sharper-than-ours/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/26/so-the-british-press-is-sharper-than-ours/#commentsTue, 26 May 2009 14:59:50 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=3378

How bad is the American Press? When the Telegraph/UK becomes more willing to report the truth about American politics than the American Press, that’s when you know for sure that Americans are getting lied to.

If al-Qaeda, the Taliban and the rest of the Looney Tunes brigade want to kick America to death, they had better move in quickly and grab a piece of the action before Barack Obama finishes the job himself. Never in the history of the United States has a president worked so actively against the interests of his own people – not even Jimmy Carter.

Obama’s problem is that he does not know who the enemy is. To him, the enemy does not squat in caves in Waziristan, clutching automatic weapons and reciting the more militant verses from the Koran: instead, it sits around at tea parties in Kentucky quoting from the US Constitution. Obama is not at war with terrorists, but with his Republican fellow citizens. He has never abandoned the campaign trail.

That is why he opened Pandora’s Box by publishing the Justice Department’s legal opinions on waterboarding and other hardline interrogation techniques. He cynically subordinated the national interest to his partisan desire to embarrass the Republicans. Then he had to rush to Langley , Virginia to try to reassure a demoralised CIA that had just discovered the President of the United States was an even more formidable foe than al-Qaeda.

“Don’t be discouraged by what’s happened the last few weeks,” he told intelligence officers. Is he kidding? Thanks to him, al-Qaeda knows the private interrogation techniques available to the US intelligence agencies and can train its operatives to withstand them – or would do so, if they had not already been outlawed.

So, next time a senior al-Qaeda hood is captured, all the CIA can do is ask him nicely if he would care to reveal when a major population centre is due to be hit by a terror spectacular, or which American city is about to be irradiated by a dirty bomb. Your view of this situation will be dictated by one simple criterion: whether or not you watched the people jumping from the twin towers…

President Pantywaist’s recent world tour, cosying up to all the bad guys, excited the ambitions of America ‘s enemies. Here, they realised, is a sucker they can really take to the cleaners.His only enemies are fellow Americans. Which prompts the question: why does President Pantywaist hate America so badly?

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/26/so-the-british-press-is-sharper-than-ours/feed/3Appease and Comparehttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/25/appease-and-compare/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/25/appease-and-compare/#commentsMon, 25 May 2009 14:35:41 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=3321I started paying attention to politics some thirty-five years ago. I watched as the watergate scandal covered the TV screen along with most every newspaper and magazine. I watched in horror as Jimmy Carter and his politics of appeasement, fumbled the football around the globe. I watched closely as Ronald Reagan faced off with Gorbachev and the mighty Soviet Empire. I watched as the charming Bill Clinton closed military bases around the country, killing thousands of small businesses and small towns in the process. I watched as George Bush stared International Terrorism in the eye, sending the American war machine to foreign soil in an effort to protect the American homeland following the attacks of September 11th, 2001.

Through the years I’ve noticed a sharp contrast between Democrats and Republicans. This is especially true when dealing with the military apparatus. President Reagan used the force of the American military apparatus to tear down the Soviet Empire without ever firing a weapon. President Clinton followed the path of many Democrat leaders before him, believing that appeasement is the way forward. The one dynamic that has held true during my lifetime and throughout American history, is the fact that weapons are going to be used to protect the homeland and the threats to our way of life that are developing on foreign soil around the globe. President Clinton’s attempts at appeasement failed utterly, with bombs being dropped and missiles launched despite his brilliant ability to deliver an eloquent speech. Speeches that were often loaded with gifts at the expense of the American tax payer.

President Obama has recently finished up a world tour, where he took it upon himself to apologize to foreign nations for American misdeeds of the past. Apparently President Obama has decided to follow Democrat leaders from the past, taking the appeasement approach while relying on the eloquence of his words to squash the many threats America faces. How has this approach worked so far? Maybe I’m biased, maybe I’m simply unwilling or incapable of the truth. So far, it seems to me that President Obama has been shut-out; 0 for 4… President Obama has apologized, thrown billions of tax payer dollars at every troubled region, promised a brand new America… But yet, his batting average is zero. The eloquence of his words are having no greater effect on our enemies than that of President’s Carter or Clinton. In fact, it would seem that our enemies our ramping up their collective efforts in the face of such incompetence. These people have studied history, and can easily predict the next American move based upon a country lead by Democrats. Been there, done that…

North Korean military honour guard standing to attention at Pyongyang’s airport during a diplomatic visit Photograph: Stephen Shaver/AFP/Getty Images

North Korea today risked further international isolation after it claimed to have successfully tested a nuclear weapon as powerful as the atomic bomb that destroyed Hiroshima.

President Barack Obama called the test a matter of grave concern to all countries. “North Korea is directly and recklessly challenging the international community,” Obama said in a statement. “North Korea’s behaviour increases tensions and undermines stability in north-east Asia.”

TEHRAN (Reuters) – Iran has sent six warships to international waters, including the Gulf of Aden, to show its ability to confront any foreign threats, its naval commander said on Monday.

Admiral Habibollah Sayyari, quoted by the ISNA news agency, made the announcement five days after Iran said it test-fired a surface-to-surface missile with a range of 2,000 km (1,200 miles), putting Israel and U.S. bases in the area within reach.

TEHRAN (Reuters) – Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday rejected a Western proposal for it to “freeze” its nuclear work in return for no new sanctions and ruled out any talks with major powers on the issue. The comments by the president, who is seeking re-election in a June 12 presidential vote, are likely to further disappoint the U.S. administration of President Barack Obama, which is seeking to engage Iran diplomatically.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday rebuffed U.S. calls for a full settlement freeze in the occupied West Bank and vowed not to accept limits on building of Jewish enclaves within Jerusalem. Netanyahu’s defiant stance set the stage for a possible showdown with U.S. President Barack Obama, who, in talks with the new Israeli prime minister in Washington last week, pressed for a halt to all settlement activity, including natural growth, as called for under a long-stalled peace “road map”. “The demand for a total stop to building is not something that can be justified and I don’t think that anyone here at this table accepts it,” Netanyahu told his cabinet, referring to Jewish settlements in the West Bank, according to an official. Netanyahu said Israel had no plans to set up any new West Bank settlements. But he told Obama, according to the official, that his government “does not accept limitations on building” within what Israel defines as its capital, the Jerusalem municipality, an area that includes Arab East Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank captured in a 1967 Middle East war.

The decision, which would make it hard for Americans in London to open bank accounts and trade shares, is being discussed by executives at Britain’s banks and brokers who say it could become too expensive to service American clients. The proposals, which were unveiled as part of the president’s first budget, are designed to clamp-down on American tax evaders abroad. However bank bosses say they are being asked to take on the task of collecting American taxes at a cost and legal liability that are inexpedient.

Andy Thompson of Association of Private Client Investment Managers and Stockbrokers (APCIMS) said: “The cost and administration of the US tax regime is causing UK investment firms to consider disinvesting in US shares on behalf of their clients. This is not right and emphasises that the administration of a tax regime on a global scale without any flexibility damages the very economy it is trying to protect.”

One executive at a top UK bank who didn’t want to be named for fear of angering the IRS said: “It’s just about manageable under the current system – and that’s because we’re big. The danger to us is suddenly being hauled over the coals by the IRS for a client that hasn’t paid proper taxes. The audit costs will soar. We’ll have to pay it but I know plenty of smaller players won’t.”

World leaders have seen the eloquence and glitter of a well spoken American Democrat many times before. Behind the eloquence and the glitter, are many opportunities for foreign nations to tap into the American wealth, while shrinking America’s power and influence around the globe. While President Obama strokes himself as a messiah of sorts, the rest of the world is very much in the game…

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/25/appease-and-compare/feed/5Eric Holder Unmaskedhttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/19/eric-holder-unmasked/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/19/eric-holder-unmasked/#commentsTue, 19 May 2009 12:55:35 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=2832As America watched Nancy Pelosi spin at speeds never recorded by a human being last week, Eric Holder was getting destroyed by Dan Lungren and Louie Gohmert.

There was a little noticed bombshell in Washington’s waterboarding melodrama last week. And it wasn’t Nancy Pelosi’s implosion in a Capitol Hill press room, where she yet again tried to explain her inexplicable failure to protest the CIA’s “torturing” of detainees. No, this one detonated in the hearing room of the House Judiciary Committee. There, Attorney General Eric Holder inadvertently destroyed the warped basis for his claim that waterboarding, as administered by the CIA, amounted to torture.

Dan Lungren, California’s former state attorney general, and Louie Gohmert, the former chief judge of a Texas appeals court. The two congressmen highlighted a fatal flaw in Holder’s theory. Moreover, they demonstrated that — despite having accused the CIA and the Bush administration of war crimes by cavalierly branding waterboarding as “torture” — the attorney general has still not acquainted himself with the legal elements of a torture offense, particularly the required mental state. This is remarkable, given that Holder’s own department explained these elements less than a month ago in a federal appeals court brief.

Rep. Lungren pointed out that if the attorney general truly believes “waterboarding is torture,” he must also think we torture our own Navy SEALs and other special-operations personnel when we waterboard them as part of their training. “No . . . not in the legal sense,” countered Holder. You see, said he, it’s “a fundamentally different thing,” because

we’re doing something for training purposes to try to equip them with the tools to, perhaps, resist torture techniques that might be used on them. There is not the intent to do that which is defined as torture — which is to inflict serious bodily or mental harm. It’s for training. It’s different.

But it’s not different because “it’s for training.” Look at the torture statute (Sections 2340 and 2340A of the federal penal code) and try to find a “training” exception. There isn’t one. What removes an act from the ambit of torture (besides lack of severe pain) is intent. Lungren pressed this point, and Holder admitted that the training was “not torture in the legal sense because we’re not doing it with the intention of harming these people physically or mentally.” Intent, he acknowledged, was the key question.

Then, Lungren pounced. The CIA interrogators who questioned top al-Qaeda captives like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Zubaydah intended no more harm to them than Navy instructors intended to their SEAL trainees. In fact, we know that the CIA went to great lengths, under Justice Department guidance, precisely to avoid severe harm. Their purpose, Rep. Lungren observed, was to “solicit information,” not to inflict torture.

When Rep. Gohmert followed up on the issue of intent, it became starkly apparent that our attorney general is either badly ill-informed about the law, or simply willing to misstate it. Gohmert asked: “If our officers, when waterboarding, had no intent to do permanent harm and, in fact, knew absolutely they would do no permanent harm to the person being waterboarded, and their only intent was to get information to save people in this country, then they would not have tortured, under your definition. Isn’t that correct?”

Holder summarily rejected this assessment, lamely attempting to fend it off by saying it would depend “on the intention of the person.” But of course, Gohmert had already stated the intention, very exactingly, in his hypothetical. In a corner again, Holder blundered. Whether Gohmert’s example would constitute torture, he surmised, suddenly depended not so much on the intention of the officers but on whether their act (i.e., waterboarding) would have the “logical . . . result” of “physically or mentally harm[ing] the person.”

Gohmert demurred, asserting: If “someone has to believe that they are doing harm to someone in order to . . . torture, then if . . . you knew without any question there was no harm being done, then there’s no torture.”

Holder replied,

No, I wouldn’t say that. . . . You can delude yourself into thinking that “what I’m doing is not causing any physical harm, it’s not causing any mental harm,” and somebody, a neutral trier of fact . . . could look at that and make the determination that, in spite of what you said, that what you have indicated is not consistent with the facts, not consistent with your actions, and therefore you’re liable under the statute for the harm that you caused.

That is completely wrong. What Holder described is the legal concept of a “general intent” crime. Most crimes fall into this category. To find guilt, all the jury (the “neutral trier of fact”) has to determine is (a) that you knew what you were doing (i.e., you intended to shoot the gun or rob the bank — you didn’t do it by mistake), and (b) the result was the logical outcome that anyone who performed such an act should have expected.

To state the matter plainly, the CIA interrogators did not inflict severe pain and had no intention of doing so. The law of the United States holds that, even where an actor does inflict severe pain, there is still no torture unless it was his objective to do so. It doesn’t matter what the average person might think the “logical” result of the action would be; it matters what specifically was in the mind of the alleged torturer — if his motive was not to torture, it is not torture.

The bottom line is, Rep. Lungren skillfully steered Attorney General Holder into the truth: As a matter of law, CIA waterboarding — like the same waterboarding actions featured in Navy SEALs training — cannot be torture because there is no intention to inflict severe mental or physical pain; the exercise is done for a different purpose. When Rep. Gohmert’s questioning made it crystal clear that Holder’s simplistic “waterboarding is torture” pronouncement was wrong, the attorney general — rather than admitting error — tried to change the legal definition of torture in a manner that contradicted a position the Justice Department had just urged on the federal courts. It seems that, for this attorney general, there is one torture standard for Bush administration officials, and another one for everybody else.

Rep. Dan Lungren: You don’t disagree with my argument though that having them on U.S. soil at least gives them a stronger opportunity to argue that they have a full panoply of Constitutional rights vis a vis being held in the United States — at least that’s been the traditional view of the federal courts, correct?
Attorney General Eric Holder: I think they could certainly argue that, but if you look at the way the courts have progressively dealt with the detainees at Guantanamo, the progression of it is pretty obvious that although they were not on American soil, they were getting more and more rights given to them starting with habeas and Hamdan and cases like that.

Lungren: We eliminate any question by bringing them to the United States as opposed to sitting in Guantanamo.

Holder: I’m not sure about that. I’m not sure.

Lungren: Well, they certainly don’t have a weakened position, do they?

Lungren then switched gears to a line of questioning aimed at clarifying the Obama Justice Department’s definition of torture. In one of the rare times he gave a straight answer, Holder stated at the hearing that in his view water-boarding is torture. Lundgren asked if it was the Justice Department’s position that Navy SEALS subjected to waterboarding as part of their training were being tortured.

Holder: No, it’s not torture in the legal sense because you’re not doing it with the intention of harming these people physically or mentally, all we’re trying to do is train them –

Lungren: So it’s the question of intent?

Holder: Intent is a huge part.

Lungren: So if the intent was to solicit information but not do permanent harm, how is that torture?

Holder: Well, it… uh… it… one has to look at… ah… it comes out to question of fact as one is determining the intention of the person who is administering the waterboarding. When the Communist Chinese did it, when the Japanese did it, when they did it in the Spanish Inquisition we knew then that was not a training exercise they were engaging in. They were doing it in a way that was violative of all of the statutes recognizing what torture is. What we are doing to our own troops to equip them to deal with any illegal act — that is not torture.

We’re training our troops to deal with illegal acts? Can you imagine this guy in combat?

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), a former judge, continued the “intent” line of questioning in an attempt to make some sense of the attorney general’s tortured logic.

Rep. Louie Gohmert: Whether waterboarding is torture you say is an issue of intent. If our officers when waterboarding have no intent and in fact knew absolutely they would do no permanent harm to the person being waterboarded, and the only intent was to get information to save people in this country then they would not have tortured under your definition, isn’t that correct?
Attorney General Eric Holder: No, not at all. Intent is a fact question, it’s a fact specific question.

Gohmert: So what kind of intent were you talking about?
Holder: Well, what is the intention of the person doing the act? Was it logical that the result of doing the act would have been to physically or mentally harm the person?
Gohmert: I said that in my question. The intent was not to physically harm them because they knew there would be no permanent harm — there would be discomfort but there would be no permanent harm — knew that for sure. So, is the intent, are you saying it’s in the mind of the one being water-boarded, whether they felt they had been tortured. Or is the intent in the mind of the actor who knows beyond any question that he is doing no permanent harm, that he is only making them think he’s doing harm.

Holder: The intent is in the person who would be charged with the offense, the actor, as determined by a trier of fact looking at all of the circumstances. That is ultimately how one decides whether or not that person has the requisite intent.

Once again, this leaves me shaking my head while wondering if Liberalism is indeed a mental disorder. Are these people honest about any issue? It would seem that liberal ideology is grounded by talking points and deception, being recreated by the moment. Spinning at the speed of sound…

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/19/eric-holder-unmasked/feed/1David A. Noebel: How The Socialist Are Destroying America From Withinhttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/16/david-a-noebel-how-the-socialist-are-destroying-america-from-within/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/16/david-a-noebel-how-the-socialist-are-destroying-america-from-within/#commentsSat, 16 May 2009 14:35:40 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=2483Today, we can link the U. S. House of Representatives–and its radical, progressive, socialistic societies and caucuses–directly to Karl Marx through Keynes and the Fabians.

Before identifying many of the House members caught up in the socialist web, however, let’s first identify the major economic dogma of the early socialists.

Socialism is the economic system of both the Marxist-Leninist worldview and the Fabian Society worldview. John Maynard Keynes was a member of the British Fabian Society, whose American counterparts were the Intercollegiate Socialist Society and the League for Industrial Democracy. Their American voices were centered in the ideas of Norman Thomas and John Dewey among others. Dewey, you may remember, was an early signatory of TheHumanist Manifesto (1933) and its atheistic, socialist gospel.

Socialists are united in their desire to see capitalism destroyed, either forcefully or gradually, and most would rejoice if Christianity were destroyed along with it. Socialists and liberals generally see in Christians “an infallible marker of mental retardation.” (ClaremontReview of Books, Winter 20008/09, 6)

The Christian worldview endorses sound or hard money, fiscal responsibility, saving for a rainy day, deferred gratification, paying off monthly credit card bills, living within one’s means, etc. Keynesian economics, on the other hand, argues for consumption, extravagance, and not providing for the future, arguing that “the great vice is saving, thrift and financial prudence.” (KeynesAt Harvard, 63) Keynesians love huge national spending and debt and high inflation-anathema to Christians and conservatives.

Socialists see capitalism as an evil economic system founded on the concepts of profit, individualism, private property, private business, freedom to buy and sell products and services, etc. Indeed, a working definition of capitalism is “the peaceful and free exchange of goods and services without theft, fraud, and breech of contract.”Capitalism is tailored to individual initiative rather than groupthink or community initiative. Nearly all inventions that have furthered the capitalistic enterprise and blessed humanity in the process have been the result of individual initiative rather than committee, group, or government activity.

In other words, socialism is an economic system that downplays the individual in favor of the group, social order, or the State. It is a system in which the State directs the economic activity of the social order through central planning and by placing economic activity under the jurisdiction of the State. Socialism is also known as collectivism or Statism and to Marx, Communism.

Today, we call this economic system “interventionism” or Keynesism. Interventionism is a kind of socialism or communism, butwithout the destruction of the bourgeoisie (which were slaughtered by the millions by Soviet and Chinese communists). Today’s Fabians/Progressives/Radicals allow their capitalist enemies to create wealth, but acquire it by taxing them instead of slaughtering them (Marx’s “reign of terrorism on the bourgeoisie”).They are then free to distribute the wealth among the economically disadvantaged, the intellectual elites, and the superior governing classes.

Such (re)distribution of wealth ensures the favorable vote of the masses being fed, entertained, housed (with sub-prime loans) and doctored.ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now) and socialism fit hand-in-glove just as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac fit Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, and Chris Dodd to a “T.”

Most Americans are totally unaware that the U.S. House of Representatives crawls with a large, well-organized assembly of socialist organizations.These organizations are dedicated to (a) bringing about the destruction of the capitalist economic system (portrayed as greedy, conservative, religious, and/or filthy rich) and (b) slowly but surely bringing production, education, food, and health care under the complete control and regulation of the federal government.

A prime example of this governmental takeover is the carbon tax currently under discussion. It would punish business and industry’s use of gas and oil products (which according to Al Gore will warm the planet by one degree over the next 100 years) by “allow[ing] the federal government to ‘control every aspect of our economy,’ according to Christopher Horner of the Competitive Enterprise Institute” (The Weekly Standard, March 16, 2009, 17).

The Legislators involved in socialistic undertaking belong to one or more radical House organizations: the Progressive Democrats of America (6 house members), the Congressional Black Caucus (43 house members), the Congressional Progressive Caucus (74 house members), and the Democrat Socialist of America.These organizations and their members quite literally comprise a Socialist Red Army within the very contours of the House of Representatives. According to the Wikipedia article on the organization, “The Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) is the single largest partisan caucus in the United States House of Representatives and works together to advance progressive [socialist] issues and causes. The CPC was founded in 1991 by independent [socialist] Congressman Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who remains a member as Senator. [The CPC] represents about a third of the House Democratic Caucus. Of the twenty standing committees of the House, eleven are chaired by members of the CPC.”

Do I have your attention? If so, go here to read the rest of this very juicy piece.

The Far Left Congress, seeing an avowed Constitution hater taking over the Oval Office, has introduced legislation to completely hamper law abiding citizens’ ability to own guns. Enter H.R. 45 Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009.

It’s really not surprising that Bobby Rush introduced this thing, given his radical stance on guns.

Our intrepid march toward socialism has been marked by government takeovers of banks, fear mongering by our chief executive in an effort to weaken the resolve of a people already much too reliant on the government, and now members of the House seek to strip away our ability to defend ourselves.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES.

(6) on the afternoon of May 10, 2007, Blair Holt, a junior at Julian High School in Chicago, was killed on a public bus riding home from school when he used his body to shield a girl who was in the line of fire after a young man boarded the bus and started shooting.

That situation, while tragic, could not be prevented by stricter gun laws. Gun control only affects law abiding citizens. Criminals will still get their weapons if they want, and what gun control does is prevent those of us who can legally possess a weapon from defending ourselves.

(8) an authorization by the applicant to release to the Attorney General or an authorized representative of the Attorney General any mental health records pertaining to the applicant;

Some other highlights of this bill include this gem, which allows the government to access your mental health records to determine if you are an acceptable choice for owning a weapon. But what is the criteria? First off, it’s none of their business, but second, who decides what kind of mental problems? How severe counts as unacceptable to them? What about when they add an amendment about physical issues? If you have a heart problem, would the government think that it’s bad for you to own a weapon? What if you are fine head-wise, but you’re on Obama’s political dissident list? This gives them far too much power and far too much subjectivity.

(4) a clear thumb print of the applicant, which shall be made when, and in the presence of the entity to whom, the application is submitted

So, the bill calls for a thumbprint to be added to the ID card. Great idea, Bobby Rush. So now, the government can run the prints from any crime scene through the database and possibly catch you for a crime you did not commit. Let’s say you go to the Sack-o-Suds and buy 22 specific items off the shelf. You pay, you leave, and another man walks in and kill the clerk. The Fed runs the prints on the counter, finds yours and sees that you’re a gun owner, and hunts you down and arrests you.

That’s not a far-fetched scenario, folks. It’s like getting your face in a mug shot lineup; every person who pages through that book has a shot at accidentally fingering you, and the fingerprint is even worse, because literally any crime committed at any place you’ve ever been has a chance of catching you in the net.

(7) a certificate attesting to the completion at the time of application of a written firearms examination, which shall test the knowledge and ability of the applicant regarding–

This section goes on to detail this massive testing procedure involving gun law, firearms storage and a whole host of other insanity. The government can’t do this. We have a little thing called the 2nd Amendment, which reads something like this:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Somehow, this sort of strikes me as “infringing.”

(b) Sense of the Congress- It is the sense of the Congress that–
(2) it is in the national interest and within the role of the Federal Government to ensure that the regulation of firearms is uniform among the States, that law enforcement can quickly and effectively trace firearms used in crime, and that firearms owners know how to use and safely store their firearms.

So much for States’ rights. Didn’t we fight a civil war about this sort of garbage not too long ago? It’s not within the rights of the Federal Government to enact overarching laws that strip away the rights provided to citizens through the Bill of Rights. That document wouldn’t be worth much if the government could strip it all away for no reason.

Giving medical records access to the government and allowing them to search your home means that this takes away your 4th Amendment rights whenever you try to exercise your 2nd Amendment rights. It’s absurd, it’s unconstitutional and completely incomprehensible.

From the NRA:

U.S. Representative Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) recently sponsored H.R. 45, also known as “Blair Holt’s Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act.”The bill is, at its core and as its name implies, a licensing and registration scheme.

The measure calls for all handgun owners to submit to the federal government an application that shall include, among many other things:a photo; an address; a thumbprint; a completed, written firearm safety test; private mental health records; and a fee.And those are only some of the requirements to be licensed!

The bill would further require the attorney general to establish a database of every handgun sale, transfer, and owner’s address in America.Moreover, the bill would make it illegal to own or possess a “qualifying firearm” — defined as “any handgun; or any semiautomatic firearm that can accept any detachable ammunition feeding device…” [emphasis added] without one of the proposed licenses.

Additionally, the bill would make it illegal to transfer ownership of a “qualifying firearm” to anyone who is not a licensed gun dealer or collector (with very few exceptions), and would require “qualifying firearm” owners to report all transfers to the attorney general’s database. It would also be illegal for a licensed gun owner to fail to record a gun loss or theft within 72 hours, or fail to report a change of address within 60 days.Further, if a minor obtains a firearm and injures someone with it, the owner of the firearm may face a multiple-year jail sentence.

H.R. 45 is essentially a reintroduction of H.R. 2666, which Rush introduced in 2007.H.R. 2666 contained much of the same language as H.R. 45, and was co-sponsored by several well-known anti-gun legislators–including Barack Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel.H.R. 45 currently has no co-sponsors.

Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.

This bill is outragous and is an example of why the State of Montana has taken matters into their own hands. I can only hope that every State in our union will follow Montana’s lead and protect their citizens 2nd Amendment rights from the Federal Government’s continued attempts at breaking down this most important amendment. Remember, the 2nd Amendment exists in case the government forgets the other ones.

The blue lines are Obama’s projected unemployment numbers with and without his $775 billion stimulus. The red triangles are actual employment numbers.

The actual numbers aren’t just worse than the rosy picture Obama painted for a world after his magical stimulus took effect. They’re worse even than the doomsday scenario he outlined if Congress didn’t pass his stimulus plan.

What kind of distraction will the media create to cover up these little details?

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/13/unemployment-numbers-the-wh-msm-dont-want-you-to-see/feed/4Socialist war on Boy Scouts of Americahttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/10/socialist-war-on-boy-scouts-of-america/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/10/socialist-war-on-boy-scouts-of-america/#commentsSun, 10 May 2009 16:48:01 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=2042We had just moved into a new community, and were talking about the programs we wanted to get our two boys involved with. I had little league and youth football on my mind, my wife was thinking about cub scouts and music. We delegated responsibilities, and got busy with sign-ups and such.

We found ourselves at our local elementary school one evening, where the sign-up procedure for cub scouts was taking place. We walked into a crowded library full of confused parents. Looking around the room, I was surprised to see what appeared to be in excess of 100 people. My wife was her usual self, on a mission! A really nice lady, dressed in uniform, walked up to me and asked me if I needed assistance. An hour later we had signed our boys up for cub scouts; what that actually meant was yet to be determined. Several days passed before we received a phone call telling us that our boys had been placed into dens, with a phone number to call for a den meeting date. I remember thinking “what have we gotten ourselves into.”

My wife took our youngest son to his meeting, (six years old at the time,) and I took our oldest son of eight years to his. My son and I arrived at the home of a perfect stranger, and found eight other parents equally as confused as I. It seems that the purpose of that first meeting was to select an adult leader for the den. This leader would then purchase a uniform and immediately sign-up for BSA training and instructions on how to run a den. Some how, both my wife and I came home from our first ever cub scout meeting as LEADERS of a cub scout den.

Shortly thereafter, we both attended a “leaders only” meeting with our Cub Master and his committee. At this meeting, we were informed that the Cub Master was retiring, as his son had moved on to Boy Scouts, and our fearless leader wanted to move on with his son. Selecting a new Cub Master was the agenda of this meeting. Somehow, I came home from that meeting the new Cub Master of a cub scout pack that was 100 members strong! Having just completed my training for a den leader, I now had to take courses on how to run a cub scout pack; a large cub scout pack.

What followed was 10 of the best years of my life. Having been a small business owner for several years, I looked at my job as Cub Master with a similar mindset as running my business. I created a committee that would oversee every aspect of the program, create activities, file all of the necessary paper work, run the pinewood derby, scouting for food, community service; all of the elements included in the Cub Scout program. I reminded myself that the program didn’t need to be tweaked or modified, that the program was exceptional, and all I needed to do was follow the program.

We created an outing for our scouts to travel across the channel to Catalina Island, at a camp called Camp Cherry Valley, run by the BSA. Tents were already set-up, included was a mess hall complete with three meals a day, BB gun range, bow & arrow lessons & range, hiking, swimming, and an opportunity to work on rank advancement. Included in this three day weekend, was a camp fire each night put on by the BSA personnel. Each den was to create a skit, rehearse the skit during the day, and perform the skit at the camp fire in front of 150 people. On the first night, the BSA staff put on the skits, and we all laughed and had a blast. The second night was all about the boys and their skits. As I sat on the side of that hill, watching these young boys perform their skits, a feeling came across me that was so powerful it brought me to tears. I realized that I had become part of something so incredible, so powerful, so worthy, so right!!! These kids didn’t care about politics, nor did they care about race, religion, ideological differences between the adults… No, these kids were learning how to perform in front of their peers; community service; how to be part of a whole; how to be a good citizen; respect for nature, the community, education, American history, and respect for adults.

As the years unfolded, I gained so much respect for the Boy Scouts of America organization and all of it’s millions of volunteers. I will forever be grateful for the experiences we had as a family; for the outings we shared with so many different families from all walks of life. Both of our sons achieved the rank of Eagle Scout, and we couldn’t be more proud of them. The scouting program has been under attack by progressive socialists for several years now. My motive for this article is to bring light to these attacks, and to make the citizens aware of this agenda to destroy this wonder program and it’s teachings.

WASHINGTON — Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund and Thomas More Law Center filed a friend-of-the-court brief Monday with the U.S. Supreme Court in defense of the Boy Scouts of America, challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union for maintaining and beautifying parks leased from the city of San Diego. The brief asks the court to consider the impact of such lawsuits on the ability of faith-based groups to provide non-religious services that have greatly benefited cities and communities since the founding of the nation.

“Groups such as the Boy Scouts shouldn’t be penalized for their beliefs, and neither should the communities that benefit from their selfless work,” said ADF Legal Counsel Dale Schowengerdt. “The Boy Scouts of America spent millions of dollars to improve portions of two public parks that it leased from the city for a nominal fee. The Scouts allowed the public to have full access to the parks, yet two couples filed suit simply because they didn’t like the beliefs of the Scouts organization. These types of ridiculous ‘offended observer’ types of lawsuits should no longer be tolerated.”

Since 1957, the Boy Scouts have leased a 16-acre parcel at San Diego’s Balboa Park. In exchange for paying a nominal fee to the city, the Scouts were allowed to lease the park and make numerous improvements to the property, including a public campground. Hundreds of other groups have similar arrangements with the city.

In 1987, the city leased another half-acre parcel to the Scouts at Mission Bay Park. The Scouts again spent millions of dollars to build an aquatic center, which is open to the entire community on a first-come, first-served basis. The ACLU filed suit against the city, the Boy Scouts, and the Desert Pacific Council on behalf of an agnostic couple and lesbian couple who alleged that leasing public land to a private group that requires members to adhere to religious faith is a violation of the Establishment Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The couples are also offended that the Boy Scouts organization requires its leaders to maintain sexual ethics consistent with the organization’s beliefs.

On June 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled that the ACLU could challenge the leases, even though its clients had never even been to the parks, been exposed to any religious symbols at the parks, or been denied any services by the Boy Scouts. The Scouts are now asking the Supreme Court to take the case.

According to the ADF-TMLC brief, “The 9th Circuit’s decision represents a new threat for faith-based organizations that choose to cooperate with the government in establishing public benefit programs…. Plaintiffs in the 9th Circuit can now challenge programs like San Diego’s with nothing more than general offense at a tenet of the organization’s mission. So as long as a person feels unwelcome by the private groups’ beliefs–without any exposure to religious symbols or denial of any services–he can sue to have the program declared unconstitutional.”

As has been the case for far too long now, bullying tactics are implemented once again to destroy a program that refused to give in to the progressive ideology.

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/10/socialist-war-on-boy-scouts-of-america/feed/8The False Claim Concerning a Right-wing Theocracyhttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/10/the-false-claim-concerning-a-right-wing-theocracy/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/10/the-false-claim-concerning-a-right-wing-theocracy/#commentsSun, 10 May 2009 14:26:41 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=2039“Among the features peculiar to the political system of the United States,
is the perfect equality of rights which it secures to every religious sect. ”
James Madison

Throughout our history, most Americans were never in doubt about the origins of our national ethos – Sinai, Jerusalem, The Ten Commandments, The Sermon on the Mount, The Torah, The New Testament – collectively known as our Judeo-Christian heritage .

For the secular left, which now occupies the White House, America’s heritage is found not in the Bible, the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution (in its original sense), but in secular humanism, collectivism and multiculturalism – values based not on timeless standards but on prevailing cultural norms, as determined by a political/media/academic elite.

Obama doesn’t want us to consider ourselves a Christian nation because the Judeo-Christian ethic conflicts with his worldview. Whatever Joel Osteen and Rick Warren tell us (Pastor Ken Hutcherson calls them “evan-jellyfish”), Obama is not a Christian – unless you consider the hate-filled ravings of his former pastor, at the church he attended for 19 years, to be Christianity.

Christian America does not condone civil unions or same-sex marriage. (It does not regard as equal all sexual acts.) Obama’s America does. Judeo-Christian America believes in the defense of innocent human life – including the most defenseless, the unborn. Obama’s America does not – witness the reputation he’s acquiring as the most pro-abortion president in U.S. history, and his votes against anti-infanticide bills as a member of the Illinois Senate. Christian America believes in limited government. It does not mistake government for God. Obama’s America believes there’s nothing the state can’t do, no power the state shouldn’t have and no limitations on its power to tax, spend and control.

Christian America understands the Biblical mandate to support Israel. Obama’s America views the Palestinians (anti-Semitic, anti-American, bloodthirsty, exalting jihad) as the moral equivalent of the Israelis (democratic, pro-American, governed by the rule of law). Obama’s fantasy of Israel and Palestine living “side by side in peace and security,” is either delusional or a euphemism for a temporary settlement which will lead to the demise of the Jewish state. Like Lincoln’s proverbial house divided, these two America’s can’t coexist forever. During his presidency, Obama means to bury Christian America, with an imam presiding at the memorial service.

Patrick Henry remarked: “It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded, not by religions, but by Christians; not on religions, but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” The Constitution is dated “in the year of our Lord, 1787,” in reference not to Allah, Krishna or Buddha, but to Jesus. Supreme Court Associate Justice Joseph Story, in his 1833 treatise on the Constitution, observed that the Founding Fathers believed “that Christianity ought to receive encouragement from the state.” In the 1931 case of U.S. v Macintosh (decided before the federal judiciary began to deconstruct the First Amendment), the Supreme Court declared, “We are a Christian people.”

Every President of the United States, including B. Hussein Obama, took an oath to uphold the Constitution on a Bible. In every case save one, it was the King James Version. Speaking of Obama’s predecessors – clearly less enlightened and worldly than the Messiah-in-Chief and probably in thrall to the religious right – their opinion is unanimous:

George Washington: “It is impossible to govern rightly without God and the Bible.” By the Bible, the Father of our Country was not referring to the Koran or the Bhagavad Gita.

John Adams: “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were…the general principle of Christianity.”

John Quincy Adams: “The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity.”

Andrew Jackson: “The Bible is the rock upon which our Republic rests” – again, in reference to the Christian Bible, not the Lotus Sutra.

Abraham Lincoln: “Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him who has never yet forsaken this favored land are still competent to adjust, in the best way, all our present difficulty.” The “present difficulty,” which Lincoln believed Christianity would resolve favorably, was a civil war in which more than 600,000 Americans died.

Woodrow Wilson:” “America was born a Christian nation. America was born to exemplify the devotion to the elements of righteousness which are derived from the revelation of Holy Scripture.”

Franklin D. Roosevelt, speaking of World War II: “Today, the whole world is divided, divided between human slavery and human freedom – between pagan brutality and the Christian ideal.”

Harry S. Truman, writing to Pope Pius XII: “This is a Christian nation. … It is not without significance that the valiant pioneers who left Europe to establish settlements here, at the very beginning of their colonial enterprise, declared their faith in the Christian religion and made ample provision for its practice and support.”

John F. Kennedy, in the midst of the Cold War: “And yet the same revolutionary belief for which our forbearers fought is still at issue around the globe, the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God.”

Thomas Jefferson said something strikingly similar: “Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we remove their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God.”

Still, the Great Community Organizer can blithely proclaim that America is no more a Christian nation than it is a Moslem nation. In a 2007 speech, Obama qualified this opinion –“Whatever we once were, we’re no longer a Christian nation.” The president thereby allowed for the possibility that America once was a Christian nation, but is no longer.

My niece (very Liberal) once asked me why I call myself a Conservative. She boldly stated, “your not a member of any particular church, you don’t talk like a religious nut case, you work construction and you get in fist fights far too often.” I asked her what her definition of a Conservative minded person was, and how she came to those conclusions. I won’t bore you with the details of that conversation, I’ll break it down in short form. Teachers, prime time news, magazines, and movies… Somehow, if you believe in a way of life that includes principles such as those found in the Ten Commandments; principles that include giving freely of yourself so that others might gain, so that the community that you live in might be a better place for all, including our children. A simple belief that anonymous acts of kindness bring about a feeling inside our spirit that no amount of money can buy. Somehow my belief in a “power greater than myself, a power I choose to call God” makes me a threat to Society. Somehow these simple elements of faith make me a right wing nut case Liberals refer to as a Conservative.

If liberals are afraid of a Judeo-Christian “theocracy,” then why didn’t our Christian Founders establish a theocracy? The theocracy they should fear, is that of Islam. However, the “theocracy” fear, is just a front, a deception. What they really fear is liberty defined within the boundaries of morality as “endowed by the Creator,” and not by Big Government.

The state of Montana has signed into power a revolutionary gun law. The State of Montana has defied the federal government and their gun laws. This will prompt a showdown between the federal government and the State of Montana. The federal government fears citizens owning guns. They try to curtail what types of guns they can own. The gun control laws all have one common goal, confiscation of privately owned firearms.

Montana has gone beyond drawing a line in the sand. They have challenged the Federal Government. The fed now either takes them on and risks them saying the federal agents have no right to violate their state gun laws and arrest the federal agents that try to enforce the federal firearms acts. This will be a world-class event to watch. Montana could go to voting for secession from the union, which is really throwing the gauntlet in Obama’s face. If the federal government does nothing they lose face.

If guns and ammunition are manufactured inside the State of Montana for sale and use inside that state then the federal firearms laws have no applicability since the federal government only has the power to control commerce across state lines. Montana has the law on their side. Since when did the USA start following their own laws especially the constitution of the USA, the very document that empowers the USA.

Silencers made in Montana and sold in Montana would be fully legal and not registered. As a note silencers were first used before the 007 movies as a device to enable one to hunt without disturbing neighbors and scaring game. They were also useful as devices to control noise when practicing so as to not disturb the neighbors. Silencers work best with a bolt-action rifle. There is a long barrel and the chamber is closed tight so as to direct all the gases though the silencer at the tip of the barrel. Semi-auto pistols and revolvers do not really muffle the sound very well except on the silver screen. The revolvers bleed gas out with the sound all over the place. The semi-auto pistols bleed the gases out when the slide recoils back. Silencers are maybe nice for snipers picking off enemy soldiers even though they reduce velocity but not very practical for hit men shooting pistols in crowded places. Silencers were useful tools for gun enthusiasts and hunters. There would be no firearm registration, serial numbers, criminal records check, waiting periods or paperwork required. So in a short period of time there would be millions and millions of unregistered untraceable guns in Montana. Way to go Montana !

Let us see what Obama does. If he hits Montana hard they could probably vote to secede from the USA. The governor of Texas has already been refusing Federal money because he does not want to agree to the conditions that go with it and he has been saying secession is a right they have as sort of a threat. Things are no longer the same with the USA. Do not be deceived by Obama acting as if all is the same, it is not.

Governor Schweitzer is very popular with Montanans, and this is an example of how he has built his popularity. It’s a breath of fresh air to see a politician run on a platform of promises, and back up those promises with action. Governor Schweitzer promised to protect the 2nd amendment rights of the citizens. With the signing of this bill, he has lived up to the billing. I don’t care about the (D) or and (R) in front of the name, say what you mean and mean what you say. Good for you Brian Schweitzer!

Text of the New Law
HOUSE BILL NO. 246
INTRODUCED BY J. BONIEK, BENNETT, BUTCHER, CURTISS, RANDALL, WARBURTON.

AN ACT EXEMPTING FROM FEDERAL REGULATION UNDER THE COMMERCE CLAUSE OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES A FIREARM, A FIREARM ACCESSORY, OR AMMUNITION MANUFACTURED AND RETAINED IN MONTANA; AND PROVIDING AN APPLICABILITY DATE. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MONTANA:

Section 1. Short title.. [Sections 1 through 6] may be cited as the “Montana
Firearms Freedom Act”.
Section 2. Legislative declarations of authority. The legislature declares
that the authority for [sections 1 through 6] is the following:
(1) The 10th amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the
states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government
elsewhere in the constitution and reserves to the state and people of
Montana certain powers as they were understood at the time that Montana was
admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those powers is a matter of
contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of
the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted
by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(2) The ninth amendment to the United States constitution guarantees to the
people rights not granted in the constitution and reserves to the people of
Montana certain rights, as they were understood at the time that Montana was
admitted to statehood in 1889. The guaranty of those rights is a matter of
contract between the state and people of Montana and the United States as of
the time that the compact with the United States was agreed upon and adopted
by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(3) The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under the
9th and 10th amendments to the United States constitution, particularly if
not expressly preempted by federal law. Congress has not expressly preempted
state regulation of intrastate commerce pertaining to the manufacture on an
intrastate basis of firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition.
(4) The second amendment to the United States constitution reserves to the
people the right to keep and bear arms as that right was understood at the
time that Montana was admitted to statehood in 1889, and the guaranty of the
right is a matter of contract between the state and people of Montana and
the United States as of the time that the compact with the United States was
agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
(5) Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution clearly secures to
Montana citizens, and prohibits government interference with, the right of
individual Montana citizens to keep and bear arms. This constitutional
protection is unchanged from the 1889 Montana constitution, which was
approved by congress and the people of Montana, and the right exists, as it
was understood at the time that the compact with the United States was
agreed upon and adopted by Montana and the United States in 1889.
Section 3. Definitions. As used in [sections 1 through 6], the following
definitions apply:
(1) “Borders of Montana” means the boundaries of Montana described in
Article I, section 1, of the 1889 Montana constitution.
(2) “Firearms accessories” means items that are used in conjunction with or
mounted upon a firearm but are not essential to the basic function of a
firearm, including but not limited to telescopic or laser sights, magazines,
flash or sound suppressors, folding or aftermarket stocks and grips,
speedloaders, ammunition carriers, and lights for target illumination.
(3) “Generic and insignificant parts” includes but is not limited to
springs, screws, nuts, and pins.
(4) “Manufactured” means that a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition
has been created from basic materials for functional usefulness, including
but not limited to forging, casting, machining, or other processes for
working materials.
Section 4. Prohibitions. A personal firearm, a firearm accessory, or
ammunition that is manufactured commercially or privately in Montana and
that remains within the borders of Montana is not subject to federal law or
federal regulation, including registration, under the authority of congress
to regulate interstate commerce. It is declared by the legislature that
those items have not traveled in interstate commerce. This section applies
to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured in
Montana from basic materials and that can be manufactured without the
inclusion of any significant parts imported from another state. Generic and
insignificant parts that have other manufacturing or consumer product
applications are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition, and
their importation into Montana and incorporation into a firearm, a firearm
accessory, or ammunition manufactured in Montana does not subject the
firearm, firearm accessory, or ammunition to federal regulation. It is
declared by the legislature that basic materials, such as unmachined steel
and unshaped wood, are not firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition and
are not subject to congressional authority to regulate firearms, firearms
accessories, and ammunition under interstate commerce as if they were
actually firearms, firearms accessories, or ammunition. The authority of
congress to regulate interstate commerce in basic materials does not include
authority to regulate firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition made in
Montana from those materials. Firearms accessories that are imported into
Montana from another state and that are subject to federal regulation as
being in interstate commerce do not subject a firearm to federal regulation
under interstate commerce because they are attached to or used in
conjunction with a firearm in Montana..
Section 5. Exceptions. [Section 4] does not apply to:
(1) A firearm that cannot be carried and used by one person;
(2) A firearm that has a bore diameter greater than 1 1/2 inches and that
uses smokeless powder, not black powder, as a propellant;
(3) ammunition with a projectile that explodes using an explosion of
chemical energy after the projectile leaves the firearm; or
(4) a firearm that discharges two or more projectiles with one activation of
the trigger or other firing device.
Section 6. Marketing of firearms. A firearm manufactured or sold in Montana
under [sections 1 through 6] must have the words “Made in Montana” clearly
stamped on a central metallic part, such as the receiver or frame.
Section 7. Codification instruction. [Sections 1 through 6] are intended to
be codified as an integral part of Title 30, and the provisions of Title 30
apply to [sections 1 through 6].
Section 8. Applicability. [This act] applies to firearms, firearms
accessories, and ammunition that are manufactured, as defined in [section
3], and retained in Montana after October 1, 2009

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/06/governor-brian-schweitzer-d-signs-revolutionary-new-gun-law-in-montana/feed/96Reframing Global Warming; the real storyhttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/03/reframing-global-warming-the-real-story/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/05/03/reframing-global-warming-the-real-story/#commentsSun, 03 May 2009 14:22:27 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=1552I know, I know; not another piece on Global Warming! We’re sick and tired of this crap sandwich! Can’t we get just call this what it is and move on, we have bigger fish to fry…

Progressive Liberals have a tool in their tool chest that they use better than the rest of us. It’s called “relentless pressure.” Story after story after story, drive the talking points home until the targeted audience wilts from the relentless 24/7 pressure. Back in grade school, we simply referred to this tactic as “tell the lie long enough, and the teacher will eventually believe it.”

Instead of grim warnings about global warming, the firm advises, talk about “our deteriorating atmosphere.” Drop discussions of carbon dioxide and bring up “moving away from the dirty fuels of the past.” Don’t confuse people with cap and trade; use terms like “cap and cash back” or “pollution reduction refund.”

EcoAmerica has been conducting research for the last several years to find new ways to frame environmental issues and so build public support for climate change legislation and other initiatives. A summary of the group’s latest findings and recommendations was accidentally sent by e-mail to a number of news organizations by someone who sat in this week on a briefing intended for government officials and environmental leaders.

Environmental issues consistently rate near the bottom of public worry, according to many public opinion polls. A Pew Research Center poll released in January found global warming last among 20 voter concerns; it trailed issues like addressing moral decline and decreasing the influence of lobbyists.

“Another key finding: remember to speak in TALKING POINTS aspirational language about shared American ideals, like freedom, prosperity, independence and self-sufficiency while avoiding jargon and details about policy, science, economics or technology,” said the e-mail account of the group’s study.

I find the reminder to “speak in talking points” very interesting. I can’t help but to wonder just how sophisticated this program is within the progressive liberal movement. From the elementary class room, through high school and on to higher education establishments spread out across our nation, the liberal talking points are spread and enforced. Our children see the same talking points while watching children’s programming on TV. Our teenagers see the same talking points while watching MTV or chatting with friends at sites such as face book. This is a very personal issue in my home, for these reasons. My youngest son was cruising along through 11th grade, until he decided to buck the system and write a rebuttal to his teachers chosen topic for essay “Climate Change.” What followed is truly frightening to us, and should be to all parents with children in the public school system. A teacher entered into his car without permission, searching for something she could use against him. The principle called my son into his office, and told him that his parents must not be very good parents, and obviously don’t punish him enough. His teachers started telling him that he should just quit school and take the GED. One administrator told my son he should take the GED and join the military, maybe the National Guard would be good for him. In other words “join the military with the rest of the dummies, that’s where you belong.” Talking points turned into mob rule when the student bucked the system. Follow our lead, or we will destroy you! Any of this look familiar as we watch this administration operate?

Is the lack of outrage because of the population’s decision that this is bad science or perhaps a thoughtful reading of the existing data?

Actually, the vast majority of the population hasn’t even thought about the issue. The muted reaction to our impending disaster comes down to two things:

1. the name.

Global is good.
Warm is good.
Even greenhouses are good places.

How can “global warming” be bad?

I’m not being facetious. If the problem were called “Atmosphere cancer” or “Pollution death” the entire conversation would be framed in a different way.

2. the pace and the images.

One degree every few years doesn’t make good TV. Because activists have been unable to tell their story with vivid images about immediate actions, it’s just human nature to avoid the issue. Why give up something we enjoy now to make an infintesimal change in something that is going to happen far in the future?

We’ve explored the limits of language in situations like this, but it’s worth pushing on this some more. What framing or phrasing do you see capturing peoples’ attention in a way that might stick?

What strikes me as offensive and frightening, is the size and scope of this agenda. From the back rooms of Congress and the White House, to the liberal think tanks, on to the media, on to the classrooms…

President Barack Obama said in Turkey : “We do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values.”

Alabama 1901, Preamble
We the people of the State of Alabama , invoking the favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following Constitution..
Alaska 1956, Preamble We, the people of Alaska , grateful to God and to those who founded our nation and pioneered this great land.
Arizona 1911, PreambleWe, the people of the State of Arizona , grateful to Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution…
Arkansas 1874, PreambleWe, the people of the State of Arkansas , grateful to Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government…
California 1879, PreambleWe, the People of the State of California , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom…
Colorado 1876, Preamble We, the people of Colorado , with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of Universe…
Connecticut 1818, Preamble.The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy.
Delaware 1897, Preamble Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature, the rights of worshipping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of their consciences…
Florida 1885, Preamble We, the people of the State of Florida , grateful to Almighty God for our constitutional liberty, establish this Constitution…
Georgia 1777, Preamble We, the people of Georgia , relying upon protection and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution…
Hawaii 1959, Preamble We , the people of Hawaii , Grateful for Divine Guidance … Establish this Constitution.
Idaho 1889, Preamble We, the people of the State of Idaho , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings.
Illinois 1870, Preamble We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful to Almighty God for the civil , political and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
Indiana 1851, Preamble We, the People of the State of Indiana , grateful to Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to choose our form of government.
Iowa 1857, Preamble We, the People of the St ate of Iowa , grateful to the Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence on Him for a continuation of these blessings, establish this Constitution.
Kansas 1859, Preamble We, the people of Kansas , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious privileges establish this Constitution.
Kentucky 1891, Preamble.. We, the people of the Commonwealth are grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties..
Louisiana 1921, Preamble We, the people of the State of Louisiana , grateful to Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy.
Maine 1820, Preamble We the People of Maine acknowledging with grateful hearts the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an opportunity .. And imploring His aid and direction.
Maryland 1776, Preamble We, the people of the state of Maryland , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty…
Massachusetts 1780, Preamble We…the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe In the course of His Providence, an opportunity and devoutly imploring His direction
Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Michigan , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom, establish this Constitution.
Minnesota, 1857, Preamble We, the people of the State of Minnesota, grateful to God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its blessings:
Mississippi 1890, Preamble We, the people of Mississippi in convention assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work.
Missouri 1845, Preamble We, the people of Missouri , with profound reverence for the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness . Establish this Constitution…
Montana 1889, Preamble.We, the people of Montana , grateful to Almighty God for theblessings of liberty establish this Constitution ..
Nebraska 1875, Preamble We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom . Establish this Constitution.
Nevada 1864, Preamble We the people of the State of Nevada , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, establish this Constitution…
New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V Every individual has a natural and unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience.
New Jersey 1844, Preamble We, the people of the State of New Jersey, grateful to Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors.
New Mexico 1911, Preamble We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of liberty..
New York 1846, Preamble We, the people of the State of New York , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings.North Carolina 1868, Preamble We the people of the State of North Carolina, grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil, political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon Him for the continuance of those…
North Dakota 1889, Preamble We , the people of North Dakota , grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain…
Ohio 1852, Preamble We the people of the state of Ohio , grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common.
Oklahoma 1907, Preamble Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty, establish this
Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I Section 2. All men shall be secure in the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their consciences
Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly invoking His guidance….
Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode Island grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing…
South Carolina , 1778, Preamble We, the people of he State of South Carolina grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this Constitution.
South Dakota 1889, Preamble We, the people of South Dakota , grateful to Almighty God for our civil and religious liberties …
Tennessee 1796, Art. XI..III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience…
Texas 1845, Preamble We the People of the Republic of Texas , acknowledging, with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.
Utah 1896, Preamble Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we establish this Constitution.
Vermont 1777, Preamble Whereas all government ought to enable the individuals who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the Author of Existence has bestowed on man ..
Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI Religion, or the Duty which we owe our Creator can be directed only by Reason and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other
Washington 1889, Preamble We the People of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution
West Virginia 1872, Preamble Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West Virginia reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God …
Wisconsin 1848, Preamble We, the people of Wisconsin, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, domestic tranquility…
Wyoming 1890, Preamble We, the people of the State of Wyoming , grateful to God for our civil, political, and religious liberties, establish this Constitution…

I have had it with you and your administration, sir. Your conduct on your recent trip overseas has convinced me that you are not an adequate representative of the United States of America collectively or of me personally.

You are so obsessed with appeasing the Europeans and the Muslim world that you have abdicated the responsibilities of the President of the United States of America . You are responsible to the citizens of the United States . You are not responsible to the peoples of any other country on earth.

I personally resent that you go around the world apologizing for the United States telling Europeans that we are arrogant and do not care about their status in the world. Sir, what do you think the First World War and the Second World War were all about if not the consideration of the peoples of Europe ? What do you think the Marshall Plan was all about? Do you not understand or know the history of the 20th century?

Where do you get off telling a Muslim country that the United States does not consider itself a Christian country? Have you not read the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution of the United States ? This country was founded on Judeo-Christian ethics and the principles governing this country, at least until you came along, come directly from this heritage. Do you not understand this?

Your bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia is an affront to all Americans. Our President does not bow down to anyone, let alone the king of Saudi Arabia . You dont show Great Britain , our best and one of our oldest allies, the respect they deserve yet you bow down to the king of Saudi Arabia . How dare you, sir! How dare you!

You cant find the time to visit the graves of our greatest generation because you don’t want to offend the Germans but make time to visit a mosque in Turkey . You offended our dead and every veteran when you give the Germans more respect than the people who saved the German people from themselves.

I am convinced that you and the members of your administration have the historical and intellectual depth of a mud puddle and should be ashamed of yourselves, all of you.

You are so self-righteously offended by the big bankers and the American automobile manufacturers yet do nothing about the real thieves in this situation, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Frank, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelic, the Fannie Mae bonuses, and the Freddie Mac bonuses. What do you intend to do about them? Anything? I seriously doubt it.

What about the U.S. House members passing out $9.1 million in bonuses to their staff members on top of the $2.5 million in automatic pay raises that lawmakers gave themselves? I understand the average House aide got a 17% bonus. I took a 5% cut in my pay to save jobs with my employer. You havent said anything about that. Who authorized that? I surely didnt!

Executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be receiving $210 million in bonuses over an eighteen-month period, that’s $45 million more than the AIG bonuses. In fact, Fannie and Freddie executives have already been awarded $51 million not a bad take. Who authorized that and why havent you expressed your outrage at this group who are largely responsible for the economic mess we have right now.

I resent that you take me and my fellow citizens as brain-dead and not caring about what you people do. We are watching what you are doing and we are getting increasingly fed up with all of you. I also want you to know that I personally find just about everything you do and say to be offensive to every one of my sensibilities. I promise you that I will work tirelessly to see that you do not get a chance to spend two terms destroying my beautiful country.

Disclosure: I have no idea to whom credit is due for this letter, as the author is unknown. I simply share this persons frustration, and wanted to see how many of you do as well.

I jumped in on this video last weekend, and bounced back in every night this week; it’s long, but absolutely worthy of your time. While President Obama, Congress, and the MSM attempt to keep Americans in a state of fear and confusion, they are busy moving their agenda forward. Several developments have conveniently slipped by many citizens while the White House and their bed partners in the media have kept our attention on a host of targeted stories.

Unexpected Urgent Refugee and Migration Needs Related To Gaza
Memorandum for the Secretary of State
By the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section 2(c)(1) of the Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1962 (the “Act”), as amended (22 U.S.C. 2601), I hereby determine, pursuant to section 2(c)(1) of the Act, that it is important to the national interest to furnish assistance under the Act in an amount not to exceed $20.3 million from the United States Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund for the purpose of meeting unexpected and urgent refugee and migration needs, including by contributions to international, governmental, and nongovernmental organizations and payment of administrative expenses of Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration of the Department of State, related to humanitarian needs of Palestinian refugees and conflict victims in Gaza.
You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

I have been hearing rumblings that these creatures are headed for my home state of Montana. Is that our punishment for voting against Obama?

First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse.

The key to sparking this rebellion would be to expose the inadequacy of the welfare state. Cloward-Piven’s early promoters cited radical organizer Saul Alinsky as their inspiration. “Make the enemy live up to their (sic) own book of rules,” Alinsky wrote in his 1972 book Rules for Radicals. When pressed to honor every word of every law and statute, every Judaeo-Christian moral tenet, and every implicit promise of the liberal social contract, human agencies inevitably fall short. The system’s failure to “live up” to its rule book can then be used to discredit it altogether, and to replace the capitalist “rule book” with a socialist one.

In 1982, partisans of the Cloward-Piven strategy founded a new “voting rights movement,” which purported to take up the unfinished work of the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Like ACORN, the organization that spear-headed this campaign, the new “voting rights” movement was led by veterans of George Wiley’s welfare rights crusade. Its flagship organizations were Project Voteand Human SERVE, both founded in 1982. Project Vote is an ACORN front group, launched by former NWRO organizer and ACORN co-founder Zach Polett. Human SERVE was founded by Richard A. Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, along with a former NWRO organizer named Hulbert James.

Both the Living Wage and Voting Rights movements depend heavily on financial support from George Soros‘s Open Society Institute and his “Shadow Party,” through whose support the Cloward-Piven strategy continues to provide a blueprint for some of the Left’s most ambitious campaigns.

Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid — they are all a part of a large, longstanding, intricately coordinated, and very highly funded movement of “progressives.” That means they are Marxists. They are destroying America because they want to. That is exactly their plan.

1. Destroys the “middle class” a.k.a., “capitalists,” a.k.a., “bourgeoisie”– (free, self reliant people, able to invest) leaving only the two-level socialist/fascist model of elites and “proletariat,” the dependent slaves of the state — they are doing that.

2. Builds the armies of the “proletariat” and turns them against the dwindling “capitalists” instead of themselves, once again by making them dependent upon government — they are doing that.

democraticunderground.com , NETROOTSNATION.org

These 2 websites for the next 12 months are recruiting AN ARMY of American civilians to walk door to door, to have meetings and help push Obama’s liberal progressive agenda! This is exactly what Hugo Chavez has been doing in Venezuela the last 10 years. Hugo Chavez created A civilian army within the Venezuelan people. Different layers of civilian army. The so called Civilian ARMY is trained to have classes, meeting, and lectures and to go door to door specially to the poor and teach the “New Revolution of Socialism!

To the point that those layers of civilian army have another purpose which is to be informants for the socialist/dictatorship government. According to the people, you cannot trust anyone including your own family because you do not know who or which of those civilian armies are the informants for the government. People are scared to say anything against the government for fear of losing their jobs or retaliation. To a point we are already seeing the civilian army unleashed in the internet. Popular conservative blog sites are hit hard by internet soldiers anytime an article hits on sensitive subject matter. Here at hotair.com, we have several of these soldiers (aka getalife) that made their way in during open registration.

I’l leave you with this little gem:

A teacher asked her 6th grade class how many of them were Obama fans. Not really knowing what an Obama fan is, but wanting to be liked by the teacher, all the kids raised their hands except for little Johnny. The teacher asked Little Johnny why he has decided to be different.

Annoyed by this answer, the teacher asked, ‘If your mom was a moron and your dad was an idiot, what would that make you?’

With a big smile, Little Johnny replied, ‘That would make me an Obama fan.’

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/30/obama-deception-headquarters/feed/2Fargo, Moorhead & Cedar Rapids; making America proudhttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/28/fargo-moorhead-making-america-proud/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/28/fargo-moorhead-making-america-proud/#commentsTue, 28 Apr 2009 22:57:45 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=1224Hurricane Katrina received headline news for several weeks, and rightfully so. The effects of Hurricane Katrina, in August 2005, were catastrophic and widespread. It was one of the deadliest natural disasters in U.S. history, leaving 1836 people dead, and a further 705 missing. The storm was large and had an effect on several different areas of North America.

The Cedar Rapid flood of 2008, was devastating as well. Why the American media didn’t give this story the same kind of coverage as Katrina, is a question we all likely know the answer to. The American media turned Hurricane Katrina and all of it’s suffering into a political driven hit job targeting the Bush administration. What was missed by many, is a story that makes me so proud to be an American. People of all faiths, ideologies, color, and ethnic background, coming together for one common purpose. Side by side, neighbors, friends, and total strangers worked feverishly to help one another. This is an example of what Americans have done since our creation. These folks weren’t spending time blaming others, while feeling sorry for themselves. These folks were busy taking action, saving lives, saving property, helping selflessly so that others could gain. I have family born, raised, and still living in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. I’m so proud of you all! This is the real America, not the America the media portrays.

Another great American story missed by the media, was the flooding of the Red River in the towns of Fargo and Moorhead. One writer wrote the following:

Sunday morning – it got to me. “Got to me” is my expression for emotions so strong my eyes get wet. I was watching a YouTube video of thousands of people in Fargo Moorhead working together, neighbor next to neighbor, to hold back the flood waters of the Red River. I saw them, teenagers and senior citizens, women and men, day and night filling, lifting and placing sand bags, one on top of the other, to build temporary dikes. I saw huge trucks, earth movers, emergency vehicles and people serving food out of their garages to hungry neighbors who had not trained to throw sand bags for hours on end. I saw people dressed in clothing to protect them from the bitter weather – some whose clothing had served them well during last fall’s hunting season. And I saw school buses hauling kids from neighboring towns learning citizenship. Talk about a deeper and more lasting lesson than a few hours in civic class.

Once again we have seen what the people of the prairie do when facing a community challenge. And they will do it again if the river foils higher dikes. If they have to fight the river again in twenty or more years, you can count on their children and grand children to do what they did. Their values will be passed from generation to generation. It is not only community, it is community continuity.

Americans across this great nation display courage & selflessness at the toughest moments, rising to the occasion. We have seen examples of this on display in Cedar Rapids and Fargo Moorhead. We have also seen examples of these great Americans in every part of this county throughout our history. Only in recent times does the American media refuse to tell such stories unless it fits their agenda. These stories will be told. These stories will get handed down to the generations that follow.

What originally prompted my friend Larry Kudlow to ask if TARP is a criminal enterprise was Wednesday’s report to Congress by TARP’s special inspector general, Neil M. Barofsky, in which it was disclosed that “nearly 20 preliminary and full criminal investigations” are underway, including “large corporate and securities fraud matters affecting TARP investments, tax matters, insider trading, public corruption, and mortgage-modification fraud.”

For example, Barofsky says he’s doing an “audit” to respond to reports that “external parties may have sought to influence decision making by Treasury or bank regulators in considering and deciding on applications for funding” from TARP. Perhaps this refers to the controversy that surfaced last January when it was said that Barney Frank (D., Mass.), the powerful head of the House Financial Services Committee, intervened to get TARP funding for a favored constituent, Boston’s OneUnited Bank. According to the Wall Street Journal, “Mr. Frank, by his own account, wrote into the TARP bill a provision specifically aimed at helping this particular home-state bank. And later, he acknowledges, he spoke to regulators urging that OneUnited be considered for a cash injection.”

Or is it the matter of the Treasury’s role in Bank of America’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch? Barofsky says he’s “auditing” that “decision making process” too. For months now that acquisition has been shrouded in controversy. It was completed at year-end, even though BofA discovered that Merrill had suffered horrible losses in the fourth quarter, far worse than anything expected when the acquisition was first announced in September. Andrew Cuomo, the attorney general of the state of New York, has been investigating why large bonuses were paid to Merrill employees before the deal closed, and why the large Merrill losses weren’t revealed to the public until January.

Read the entire aritcle folks, and be sure to read the links provided within the piece. We, the people, must spread the truth on our own, as the MSM will only provide cover for such actions. The days of the so called MSM acting as watch dogs for the people ended years ago. We are on our own, which is exactly why those in power of our government are busy trying to plot a method that will eventually take away our ability to spread such information.

Exit question: Could it be that what we are witnessing coming from the sacred halls of Congress, is in fact the largest act of organized crime ever established?

What conclusions can we draw? 1) The government’s $3 trillion and counting TARP program represents the greatest opportunity for sharp operators to profit at taxpayer expense in history. 2) The Obama administration is either in favor of giving Wall Street sharks this opportunity or, at a minimum, doesn’t much mind doing so. (If this seems odd, remember where Obama got the biggest chunk of campaign contributions in 2008.) 3) It may be that the TARP complex of programs is the beginning of a national-socialist type takeover of the financial services industry by the federal government. Thus, 4) we can only hope that this turns out not to be the case, and TARP is only the biggest–and perhaps, by the end of the day, the crookedest–waste of taxpayer money in history. Finally, 5) so far the only person or organization who appears to be looking out for the taxpayers is the Special Inspector General. We will be reading his future reports with great interest.

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/26/tarp-barney-frank-corruption/feed/10Montana town wants to be the new Gitmohttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/25/montana-town-wants-to-be-the-new-gitmo/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/25/montana-town-wants-to-be-the-new-gitmo/#commentsSat, 25 Apr 2009 14:10:08 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=985Several years ago, my wife and I were sitting in our home in beautiful So. California, sipping on some delicious hot coffee, talking about the need to pick a new State to call home, and the need to get our son’s out of harms way before they got stuck in California. We both made a list of criteria that we each deemed necessary, compared lists, modified, and started our search. This was a drastic plan of action, as our immediate family members all lived close by. Following two years of research, we settled in on a specific area of Montana. We then broke the news to our parents and siblings. We started construction of our new home in Montana in 2005, made the permanent move in 2006.

A few days ago, we learned that a city near us built a prison on the basis of “build the facility, and thecriminals will come.” While spending most of our adult lives in California, we watched as government forced their will upon the citizens, making decisions that left us shaking our heads in disbelief. This morning my wife and I were enjoying a delicious cup of hot coffee, shaking our heads in disbelief of the current news of a possible relocation of Gitmo prisoners coming to a town near by. It boggles the mind how government claims to be the representative of the people, while sticking it to us at every turn.

The long halls of the Two Rivers Detention Facility may be empty and dark, but the building is aglow in the national spotlight. The executive director of Two Rivers Authority, which owns the facility in Hardin, is fielding calls and giving interviews to national media since word came out the organization would like to house Guantanamo detainees.

The development authority in Hardin, a city of 3,400 people bordering the Crow Indian Reservation, built the $27 million, 460-bed jail two years ago and has been looking for tenants ever since. Its construction loans are in default.

Montana residents do have some good news as well:

The rest of the state’s congressional delegation — Democratic Sen. Jon Tester and Republican Rep. Denny Rehberg — agreed that bringing Guantanamo prisoners to Montana is a bad idea, though they support efforts to find some other use for the jail.

Montanans have stocked their shelves with guns and ammo since the election of Barack Obama, fearing an attack on the 2nd ammendment will be a vocal point of the new administration. Having international terrorists delivered to our backyard; well, that was not the original purpose for recent purchases…

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/25/montana-town-wants-to-be-the-new-gitmo/feed/6The Green Room; explained in layman’s termshttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/23/the-green-room-explained-in-laymans-terms/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/23/the-green-room-explained-in-laymans-terms/#commentsThu, 23 Apr 2009 15:10:03 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=914I have been receiving loads of emails from family & friends, most of which were directed to HotAir by myself over the past few years, asking me about the Green Room and it’s purpose. I have also sensed similar feelings expressed in the comments section, some of which trend towards animosity or resentment for those who are currently participating with this project. For these reasons, I will attempt to give you my perspective while reminding you that I only speak for myself.

AllahPundit and Ed Morrsisey cover the current news cycle everyday, and do a great job. The Green Room gives HorAir readers additional reading material created by several different minds, personalities, and backgrounds. Folks can read different posts that interest them, choose to engage in the comment section with the blogger, or engage in debate with others. As is the case with life itself, each of us have different interests and different takes on any given subject. We all come from different walks of life, most of us have a career in something other than blogging. I will be posting on topics and issues that interest me the most. I’m a guest here along with the rest of the HotAir community. I hope to create posts that will be as interesting to you and they are to me. This is a place we can come for some good reading, and an opportunity to engage with others while venting some hot air.

My career of 37 years is in the construction industry. I have been a small business owner for 27 years. I have been very active within my community most of my adult life, and have engaged in political grassroots efforts for the past 25 years. I’m a little rough around the edges, being a construction guy. I like to roll in the dirt a bit, so to speak…

Enjoy the Green Room folks… That’s the bottom line.

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/23/the-green-room-explained-in-laymans-terms/feed/14Rush Limbaugh: The World Laughs at His 100 Days of Failurehttp://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/22/rush-limbaugh-the-world-laughs-at-his-100-days-of-failure/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/22/rush-limbaugh-the-world-laughs-at-his-100-days-of-failure/#commentsThu, 23 Apr 2009 02:50:04 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=897Did you hear Janet Napolitano the other day? Janet Napolitano said the 9/11 hijackers actually got into our country through Canada. So now the Canadians are up in arms and the National Post in Canada today has a piece asking how in the hell did this woman get her job? Earlier this week she says it’s not a crime to illegally enter the country, cross the border, when it is. She’s a ditz. She’s a total hick, hack, left-wing kook that is now in charge of Homeland Security — and she’s there because who chose her? Obama! I mean, you Obama people cannot have it both ways. You cannot say this guy is something brand-new and fresh like we’ve never had before, and he’s so smart, and he’s so in control, he’s so in touch. And then say he has no clue what’s going on in his own administration, or that he’s being pressured and he’s buckling to pressure. What was funny about the interrogation memo flip-flop was when he talked about allowing Holder… If this happens — we keep talking about overreaching. If this happens, if Eric Holder — and he could very well do this — does instigate investigations or let Conyers do it over in the House or somebody start investigating former Bush administration officials, if they subpoena them, and if these guys have to go out and get lawyers, let me tell you something. If this happens, they don’t care whether they get a conviction or not. It won’t be about that.

Finals week, Barack Obama approaching a hundred days. Now, they say this has been a historically productive 100 days. I have just put a list here together in no particular order, just off the top of my head, of the things in this administration that have stood out to me since it began. Admiral Blair — this is all over the New York Times today — Admiral Blair admitting the CIA received high value, lifesaving information from terrorists, while President Obama is condemning the same interrogations as immoral and counterproductive. President Obama is throwing and has thrown grand White House parties with Kobe beef, a hundred bucks a pound, while telling the nation to cut back in order to survive the greatest economic downturn supposedly since the Great Depression, bowing to the king of Saudi Arabia, listening patiently and respectfully while a two-bit dictator lectures Obama — it was Daniel Ortega — with false charges for 50 minutes about the criminal country he leads, and Obama doesn’t say one word to object, one word in disagreement, does not stand up for his country at one point during the Summit of the Americas.

He has run around the world and apologized for the greatest, the most compassionate, the most innovative and freedom-loving country in world history. Now we’ve got Fidel Castro setting Obama straight about how Cuba handles political prisoners and its economy. Fidel Castro, one of Obama’s idols, calling him superficial. We had the nomination of tax cheats to his cabinet, including the man who oversees the IRS, five tax cheats in the Obama administration. We have Obama’s joke of a press spokesman, who makes a complete idiot of himself on a daily basis. He sends back a symbol of freedom, that bust of Sir Winston Churchill to Great Britain just after moving into the White House. He wants nothing to do with it. He did of his own volition. They said you can keep it. He said no, we don’t want it here. They said put it in a different room in the White House. We don’t want it here, and sent it back to the British embassy. It was given to us, President Bush, after 9/11, by the Brits. He insulted the prime minister of England, the queen of England, with embarrassing, thoughtless gifts. We have the French president Sarkozy ridiculing Obama’s messianic complex, inviting him to walk on water at Normandy beach. We have Iran taking a hostage, an American journalist, as Obama promises better relations. We have North Korea humiliating Obama with their missile launch. We have Obama putting the country in debt for generations to come while promising fiscal responsibility, offering up laughable budget cuts, banning lobbyists from his administration, while appointing them left and right. Openly lying that Caterpillar would hire up with the passage of his stimulus bill, then watching while that company lays off thousands after the stimulus bill passes. He pledges to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay where I have a thriving merchandise business. But then he keeps it open with no plan for its future. Proclaiming total transparency, while keeping secret who got the TARP funds, when, where, why. Being incapable of communicating without a teleprompter, while the press declares him a Reaganesque, Great Communicator.

He attacks a private citizen broadcaster from the White House as part of an orchestrated plan to distract the country from legislation and policies we don’t want, which thus touched off a political firestorm, all of this while claiming to be a unifier. He makes a ham-handed attempt to nationalize the banks preventing financial institutions from paying back TARP money they don’t need or want. We got a column today in the Wall Street Journal by Holman Jenkins that General Motors is a debacle; it is an absolute debacle and mess, and soon Wall Street is going to be the same thing. He has made bad situations worse with car manufacturers, and the worst is yet to come. He has sparked hundreds of protests involving hundreds of thousands of Americans at tea parties regarding irresponsible government spending while his Homeland Security chief labels peacefully demonstrating Americans and veterans as security risks. Now, that’s just the things I could think up the top of my head. Oh, yeah, moving the census over to the Commerce department to politicize that. I mean, this administration has been one part joke, one part unbelievable, and many parts scary. Because while all this has gone on, this man is reported upon and reported to be the best president we’ve ever had, a shining light, a beacon, historical figure.

We have a sycophantic mainstream media in this country. How about the New York Times. The New York Times, $34 million in cash. The New York Times is in debt $1.3 billion. By the way, this is cool, folks. The New York Times’ corporate president and CEO, Janet Robinson, received a compensation package valued at $5.58 million last year while the publisher of the New York Times, Arthur Sulzberger Jr. received a total of $2.4 million while this company is losing its shirt. Does that not sound a little bit like Wall Street? Does this not sound like excessive bonuses? Does this sound like CEOs paying them when the performance of their company is in the sewer? And haven’t we demonized private sector CEOs for this very thing? Oh, and that is another one: making enemies out of people in the private sector and ginning up protests by his ACORN buddies at the homes of AIG executives, fomenting class hatred and rivalry.

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/22/rush-limbaugh-the-world-laughs-at-his-100-days-of-failure/feed/14DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano MUST BE FIRED!http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/22/dhs-secretary-janet-napolitano-must-be-fired/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/22/dhs-secretary-janet-napolitano-must-be-fired/#commentsWed, 22 Apr 2009 13:10:43 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=855 And just so it’s perfectly clear, we aren’t talking about her resigning (either gracefully or in disgrace). And it’s way too late for backhanded apologies, like the ‘slap-in-the-face’ she already gave the brave men and women who have wore a uniform and proudly served this country.

Janet Napolitano must be FIRED… and it should have been done yesterday!

You see, the problem is not just that Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) put together a so-called anti-terrorism security assessment that targets mainstream Americans as dangerous extremists.

We’re talking about millions of people who believe that our government is too large and taxes us too much, like those who participated in the TEA Parties on tax day. We are talking about everyday Americans who believe that the 2nd Amendment actually gives people the right to bear arms; people who are pro-life; the millions of people who believe that our nation’s immigration laws should be strictly enforced.

And the problem is not simply that this so-called security assessment targets patriotic Americans – and they are talking about YOU – as “right wing extremists,” or, as Peter Kirsanow with the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights put it:

“That DHS report warning about all manner of ‘right-wing extremists’ could be considerably shortened if it simply alerted law-enforcement officials to be on the lookout for people from ‘small towns (who are) bitter (and) cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment.’”

The problem is that this is the same Janet Napolitano who just recently told us that horrendous, unspeakable acts committed by actual terrorists, dead set on destroying our country and killing Americans, should be called “man-caused disasters.”

Specifically she told Der Spiegel:

“In my speech, although I did not use the word ‘terrorism,’ I referred to ‘man-caused’ disasters. That is perhaps only a nuance, but it demonstrates that we want to move away from the politics of fear toward a policy of being prepared for all risks that can occur.”

So… when it comes to actual acts or threats of terrorism against mainstream Americans, we should move beyond the “politics of fear.”

But patriotic Americans like YOU – who exercise your Constitutionally-protected First Amendment rights – pose a threat to the government.

Is it actually possible that Napolitano and Barack Obama and even some within the Obama Administration are so twisted as to believe that Islamic Terrorists are the good guys and that you are the bad guys?

“What and who exactly are President Obama’s homeland security officials afraid of these days? If you are a member of an active conservative group that opposes abortion, favors strict immigration enforcement, lobbies to protect Second Amendment rights, protests big government, advocates federalism, or represents veterans who believe in any of the above, the answer is: You.”

If what is contained in this leaked DHS security assessment does not bring you to the realization that it is time for all patriotic Americans who love freedom to stand up and shout that we’re not going to take it anymore… it is quite possible that nothing will.

The DHS Report Targets All Of You Bitter People Out There Who Cling To Guns And Religion.

Malkin is not alone. Syndicated radio talk-show host Michael Reagan went so far as to ask the following:

“Have we really come to this? Has Adolf Hitler’s propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels been reborn and recruited by the Obama administration to scare the heck out of the American people with absurdities such as this whacked-out document?”

Lance Fairchok writing for AmericanThinker.com hits the nail squarely on the head.

Calling this so-called security assessment “a shot across the bow” he plainly states that DHS is NOT simply referring to individuals living on society’s fringe.

The assessment is, in fact, referring to YOU and patriotic Americans like you.

Moreover, Fairchok believes this assessment was hastily and sloppily written in order to fit a sick and disgusting preconceived notion:

“This ‘assessment’ is not an analysis of a national trend or an examination of existing evidence or even recent radical literature; it is targeting those whose politics fall within the broad insinuations contained within its pages, namely mainstream conservatives.”

“The summary contains few proper names, has no footnotes of any significance, lists very few sources, and is drafted with a prejudice against anyone who criticizes the role of the federal government in our lives today. It lumps together in its definition of ‘rightwing extremism’ hate groups, anti-government groups, and single issue groups ‘such as opposition to abortion or immigration.’”

Let’s state it more plainly. As far as Janet Napolitano’s DHS is concerned, if you are pro-life or believe in strict enforcement of our immigration laws, or if you attended one of those TEA parties, you’re the same as a neo-Nazi, or a member of the KKK. You are dangerous and pose no less a threat than the real terrorists trying to destroy our great country. Is it possible that when Barack Obama spoke of bitter people from small towns who cling to God and their guns that he was not just simply being derisive?

Is it possible that pointing out that Barack Obama sat in a Church for years listening to a lunatic pontificate, “Not God Bless America… God D___ America”WAS relevant after all?

What purpose can be served by a document that classifies mainstream Americans as “extremists” who pose a clear and present danger to our nation’s security?

Fairchok again:

“It is a manipulative information tool intended to paint the loyal opposition as reactionary kooks who are prone to violence and a danger to the country. … This is part of a more widespread ongoing information campaign to plant and reinforce critical themes into the American official, and broader public psyche, a continuation of the ‘clinging to guns and religion’ message so frequently found in the rhetoric of President Obama and his acolytes.”

And Fairchok concludes by issuing a very somber warning.

“And we ain’t seen nothin’ yet.”

But what is even more disturbing is that DHS NEVER intended the public to see this so-called security assessment. It was a secret.

Reagan again:

“Obviously recognizing that public knowledge of the nonsense alleged in this document is very undesirable, the weirdoes who prepared it did not want you to see it. … They warn: ‘No portion of the LES (Law Enforcement Sensitive) information should be released to the media, the general public, or over non-secure Internet servers.’”

Judge Napolitano again:

“The document itself cautions the reader that the document is ‘not to be released to the public, the media, or other personnel who do not have a valid need-to-know without prior approval’ of the DHS. The document refers to itself as one of a series of intelligence assessments intended to ‘deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks against the United States.’”

But there’s even more.

Are you ready for this?

The portion of this so-called security assessment that was leaked is only a SUMMARY.

The bulk of it remains CLASSIFIED. We have no idea what’s in it.

Judge Napolitano continues:

“The summary (unclassified) document is terrifying. One can only imagine what is contained in the classified version. This document runs directly counter to numerous U.S. Supreme decisions prohibiting the government from engaging in any activities that could serve to chill the exercise of expressive liberties. Liberties are chilled, in constitutional parlance, when people are afraid to express themselves for fear of government omnipresence, monitoring, or reprisals. The document also informs the reader that Big Brother is watching both public and private behavior.”

But whatever else is in there… it cannot be pretty.

Judge Napolitano yet again:

“My guess is that the sentiments revealed in the report I read are the tip of an iceberg that the DHS would prefer to keep submerged until it needs to reveal it. This iceberg is the heavy-hand of government; a government with large and awful eyes, in whose heart there is no love for freedom, and on whose face there is no smile.” (source: newsmax.com)

Wow, what an exciting event! People from all walks of life gathered in downtown Billings to protest the out of control spending, as well as the breath taking power grab that is taking place by President Obama and the Democrat controlled Congress. The energy at this event put goose bumps on my arms. Despite a combination of snow and rain, a large crowd of all ages gathered for this peaceful Tea Party protest. People driving by in their trucks, cars, and emergency vehicles honked and waived their hands in a show of support. A lovely lady headed up a station where a petition was getting signed by the Tea Party participants, which will eventually finds it’s way to the White House. I didn’t witness any trouble of any kind, just a huge amount of energy and genuine disgust for the crazy spending and nationalization of American businesses.

The so called Main Steam Media can continue to ignore these Tea Party’s, they can call the participants silly names, they can present this story as a bunch of right wing terrorists trying to create a stir for purposes of recruiting… They will not silence this movement, as this movement is not dircted by any political party. This movement is not directed by any Religious organization. This movement is directed by mainstream Americans who are sick and tired of watching the corruption and blame game that has rendered our political establishment as dysfunctional beyond comprehension. Mainstream Americans, not Republicans or Democrats, not the Poor, nor the Rich… Americans of all walks of life have had it with the corruption, the lying, the cheating, the blaming of anybody & anything but themselves.

When the numbers are calculated, the totals will likely be in the millions of American citizens who participated in civil protest on this day. Ignore that media heads, ridicule that media heads… You won’t stop this movement, as this movement is something you can’t understand. No, you in the media are so far out there, so far away from the mainstream, you haven’t a clue as to what this is all about.

The uncompromising verdict of Dr Mörner is that all this talk about the sea rising is nothing but a colossal scare story, writes Christopher Booker.

If one thing more than any other is used to justify proposals that the world must spend tens of trillions of dollars on combating global warming, it is the belief that we face a disastrous rise in sea levels. The Antarctic and Greenland ice caps will melt, we are told, warming oceans will expand, and the result will be catastrophe.

This fits the mold perfectly. Must have reason/cause for the catastrophe.

The reason why Dr Mörner, formerly a Stockholm professor, is so certain that these claims about sea level rise are 100 per cent wrong is that they are all based on computer model predictions, whereas his findings are based on “going into the field to observe what is actually happening in the real world”.

When running the International Commission on Sea Level Change, he launched a special project on the Maldives, whose leaders have for 20 years been calling for vast sums of international aid to stave off disaster. Six times he and his expert team visited the islands, to confirm that the sea has not risen for half a century. Before announcing his findings, he offered to show the inhabitants a film explaining why they had nothing to worry about. The government refused to let it be shown.

One of his most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC’s favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a “corrective factor” of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they “needed to show a trend”.

This article characterizes my scepticism for Global Warming. I’ve been around long enough to recognize the game vs. legitimate issues. The red flag for me was the theme that this issue is not up for debate, that this issue is proven and therefore is a real threat to our planet and could be catastrophic for mankind. From newsrooms, to classrooms, to political venues, Liberals will not engage in any form of opposing dialogue. Liberals will not debate the cost to citizens, businesses, industries, transportation of product. This is an open ended ticket, with no visible boundaries.

I don’t know of anybody who doesn’t desire to keep our planet healthy. Milllions of Americans are implementing green technology into their homes, vehicles, & businesses. This is not a Democrat vs. Republican issue between the citizens, as citizens of all ideologies are taking action to improve our enviroment by way of new technology. I remember being sent home from elementary school due to smog alerts. I remember pollution in our rivers, streams, and lakes so extreme, it was killing wildlife. We have made great strides through the years.

Since the media, our Democrat politicians, and our educators will not allow for debate on this issue, I would love to have a debate without their blessing. The following links provide for useful and interesting information. Please read up, add your own links, and throw your 2-cents into this thread.

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/14/rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told/feed/16Star-Spangled Banner; the story.http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/13/star-spangled-banner-the-story/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/13/star-spangled-banner-the-story/#commentsMon, 13 Apr 2009 22:43:40 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=100This video is dedicated to every person who serves in our military and safety forces and who continue to keep us safe and FREE. America’s real treasure; those who serve us so gallantly.

This video-story is 12 minutes long, but well worth the view. America is so rich with history & bravery.

Exit question: What portion of our youth has learned this type of American history in classrooms?

]]>http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/13/star-spangled-banner-the-story/feed/20Control over the message; it begins when we drop our children off at school.http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/12/control-over-the-message-it-begins-when-we-drop-our-children-off-at-school/
http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2009/04/12/control-over-the-message-it-begins-when-we-drop-our-children-off-at-school/#commentsSun, 12 Apr 2009 13:24:01 +0000http://hotair.com/greenroom/?p=27The relationship between Unions and the Democrat Party has been well documented. Far too many Americans remain unaware of just how this partnership effects their personal lives, and plays a significant role in their homes. I’ll speak from my own experience, and my focus will be on the public education system.

Both of my sons attended a highly ranked public school district in So. California. My wife and I put the education of our children at the top of our priority list. As is the case with most families, we taught our children the human values that we held close to our heart. We taught our children the principles of life that we deem important for their character, as well as their ability to achieve peace within their own spirit. Like most parents, we also wanted balance in their lives. We got our children involved in youth sports, scouting, music, hiking, and other outdoor activities.

The day came, when we started to notice some conflicting information coming home with our children by way of teachers. What really bothered us, is that this information didn’t really have any connection with what we were sending our children to school for; reading, writing, math, science, history. No, quite the contrary. Our third grader came home telling us all about how to put a condom on a cucumber, and describing a Vagina in detail. Wow, that got our attention. We then started paying closer attention to exactly what kind of subject matter was taking place in school. What we discovered was shocking, at least to us. A leftist agenda was taking place so blatantly, it was like a total rewrite of history. American heroes were limited to Democrats, with great Americans such as Ronald Reagan reduced to rubbish. We could take most any subject being taught in any classroom, and the subject matter was tilted severely towards a Liberal mindset. Global Warming was getting shoved down the kids throats relentlessly, with no opposing thoughts allowed. Democrat politicians were being raised up, and branded as the smart people, while Republican politicians were reduced to everything negative. What really got under our skin, was simply that we didn’t send our kids to school for these reasons; we send our kids to school for reading, writing, math, history, and science. We spend but a few hours a day with our kids during the week. Teachers spend 6-7 hours a day with our kids. The perfect storm!

My 11th grader was forced to watch Al Gore’s propaganda movie for the 3rd time in his Science class recently. The teacher told the class that 98% of the worlds scientist agreed with the data described in this movie. The class was then issued an assignment to write an essay about Global Warming and the harm being done to the planet by humans. My son (with my help) wrote a wonderful rebuttal, dozens of pages long, with dozens of articles taken from science data available on the internet. My son tried to have a conversation with his teacher about a specific story he printed out that came from the NASA website, and his teacher simply said “that report was bought and paid for by a big oil company.” That was the end of the discussion, as this teacher would have no part of opposing dialogue.

What are we to do about this? This administration is beholding to the Teachers Union, and is plotting a way to make any alternate form of education off limits, thus forcing our children into the public school system where the brainwash is controlled. School vouchers, home schooling, private schools tied to a religion; all on the chopping blocks. Remove all choices from the parents! Is this what we want from our government?

Here is a link to a WAPO story that is a sign of where we are heading under this administration.